Fall 1980 Quarterly Review - Theological Resources For Ministry

V O L . I, N O .
1 F A L L 1980
A Scholarly Journal for Reflection on Ministry
QUARTERLY REVIEW
ADVANCE EDITION
Exegesis of Isaiah P a s s a g e s for Advent

Eivrett Tihon
Pastoral Ministry During Advent
Robert C. Leslie
Unfolding John Wesley
Frank Baker
Critiques of the L u t h e r a n - U n i t e d Methodist S t a t e m e n t o n Baptism
Arthur Landwehr. UMC, and David Tiede, Lutheran
Plus Book Reviews
QUARTERLY REVIEW
A Scholarly Journal for Reflection o n Ministry
A publication of T h e United Methodist Publishing H o u s e

John E. Procter, President and Publisher
and the United Methodist Board of Higher Education and Ministry
F. Thomas Trotter, General Secretary
Editorial Director, Ronald P. Patterson
Editor, Charles E. Cole
Book Review Editor, Carey J. Gifford
Editorial Board
F. T h o m a s Trotter, Chair Cornish Rogers
Fred B. Craddock Claremont United Methodist Church
Candler School of Theology Claremont, California
Keith R. Crim Roy I. Sano
Virginia C o m m o n w e a l t h University Pacific School of Religion
Leander Keck John L. Topolewski
Yale Divinity School Christ United Methodist Church
Sallie M c F a g u c Mountaintop, Pennsylvania
Vandcrbilt Divinity School
Quarterly Review provides continuing education resources for professional

ministers in The United Methodist Church and other churches. A scholarly journal
for reflection on ministry, Quarterly Review seeks to encourage discussion and
debate on matters critical to the practice of ministry.
Falling within the purview of the journal are articles and reviews on biblical,
theological, ethical, and ecclesiastical questions; homiletics, pastoral counseling,
church education, sacred music, worship, evangelism, mission, and church
management; ecumenical issues; cultural and social issues where their salience to the
practice of ministry can be demonstrated; and the general ministry of Christians, as
part of the church's understanding of its nature and mission.
Articles for consideration are welcome from lay and professional ministers, United
Methodists, and others, and should be mailed to the Editor, Quarterly Review, Box
8 7 1 , Nashville, Tennessee 37202. Manuscripts should be approximately twelve to
twenty-five pages in length and should be in English and typed double-spaced, and
the original and one duplicate should be submitted. N o sermons, poems, or
devotional material are accepted. Queries are welcome. A style sheet is available on
request. Payment is by fee, depending on edited length.
Quarterly Review is published four times a year in March, June, September, and
December by the United Methodist Board of Higher Education and Ministry and T h e
United Methodist Publishing House. Editorial offices are at Box 871, Nashville,
Tennessee 37202. Quarterly Review is distributed through the boards of ordained
ministry of annual conferences of The United Methodist Church at the following
rates: $10 a year for the all-conference subscription; $15 a year for the conference
leadership subscription; and individual subscriptions at $20 a year for one year.
Library rate, $15 a year. Individual subscriptions may be obtained by sending a
m o n e y order or check to Quarterly Review, Division of Ordained Ministry, United
Methodist Board of Higher Education and Ministry, Box 8 7 1 , Nashville, TN 37202.
Postmaster: Address changes should be sent to Division of Ordained Ministry, Box
8 7 1 , Nashville, T N 37202.
Subscribers wishing to notify publisher of their change of address should notify
the secretary of their conference board of ordained ministry; a library or other direct
subscriber should notify Division of Ordained Ministry, Box 871, Nashville, T N
37202.
Single issues and reprinted volumes are available from The United Methodist
Publishing House, 201 Eighth Avenue South, Nashville, TN 37202.
An index is printed in the winter volume (number four) of each year, except for the
first year of publication ( 1 9 8 0 - 8 1 ) , w h e n the index will be printed in number five, also
the winter issue, since that issue will include the a d v a n c e edition and the four regular
editions.
Quarterly Review: A Scholarly Journal for Reflection on Ministry
Advance Edition
Copyright 1980, The United Methodist Board of Higher Education and Ministry
ISSN 0270-9287
QUARTERLY REVIEW
CONTENTS
Introducing Quarterly Review
Ronald P. Patterson 3
Why a Continuing Education Resource for Ministry?
F. Thomas Trotter 5
Homiletical Resources: Exegesis of Isaiah Passages for
Advent
Everett Tilson 7
Pastoral Ministry During Advent
Robert C, Leslie 36
Unfolding John Wesley: A Survey of Twenty Years' Studies
in Wesley's Thought
Frank Baker 44
A Lutheran-United Methodist Statement on Baptism 59
What Would Lutherans and United Methodists Talk About
If They Were to Talk?
Arthur J, Landwehr 69
It Seemed Good to Us . . . and the Holy Spirit!
David L. Tiede 75
Book Reviews 81
Betz and Sanders Depict Paul Among Jews and Gentiles
David J. Lull 81
The Church and the Two-Career Marriage
Rosemary Skinner Keller 87
INTRODUCING
QUARTERLY REVIEW
RONALD P. PATTERSON
Since the mid-1800s, the name Quarterly Review has been

associated with Methodism and scholarly endeavors. The old
Quarterly Review survived in various formats until its demise in
1930. In 1932, it was reborn as the ecumenical review, Religion in
Life, The Uniting Conference of 1939 ordered and sponsored
Religion In Life, with the Book Editor responsible for its contents.
Through the ensuing decades (forty-eight years), RIL
faithfully served the church at large by devoting its pages to
scholarly articles on teachings, trends, and influential happen
ings within the church. It also reflected significant movements
in the modern church worldboth in theology and in life. It was
published from 1932 through 1980.
The launching of the new Quarterly Review is an attempt to
recapture the spirit and scope of its mid-1800s predecessor. The
Methodist Quarterly Review was unashamedly directed toward
Methodistsso is QR designed primarily for United Method
ists. The MQR was seen as a continuing education link with the
frontier pastorso is QR designed to reach those ministers on
the frontiers of faith. MQR's pages were devoted to theology,
ecclesiastical polity, education, and literature. These subjects
were discussed mostly in the form of elaborate reviews. Q R will
give major attention to substantial book reviews.
The content of QR will be cooperatively developed by The
United Methodist Publishing House and the Board of Higher
Education and Ministry. In addition, the new QR will also
feature biblical exegesis, prepared specifically for sermon
preparation. Depth articles on the practice of ministry and
theology, along with scholarly documents and reprints of
important studies, will also be included.
Ronald P. Patterson is Book Editor of The United Methodist Church and Editorial
Director of Quarterly Review.
3
QR A D V A N C E EDITION, FALL 1980
John Emory, book agent of the Methodist Book Concern,

wrote about the Methodist Quarterly Review he was about to
launch in 1830.
For this class of periodicals there is certainly a greater vacancy in the

department of theological journals, at the present day, particularly in
our own denomination. There is danger, too, of satisfying ourselves,
on the one hand, with light and transient reading, and, on the other,
with light and transient writing. We yet need a journal which shall
draw forth the most matured efforts of our best writers, whether in the
ministry, or among other intelligent and literary contributors; where
also they may have room for ampler and more exact discussion, in a
record which shall endure for the inspection of posterity.
This is our hope and prayer, 150 years later, as we begin this
new publishing ventureQuarterly Review: A Scholarly Journal for
Reflection on Ministry.
4
WHY A CONTINUING EDUCATION
RESOURCE FOR MINISTRY?
F. T H O M A S T R O T T E R
QR has its "second birth" with this issue. It is not just another
journal in a universe of journals. It is a special journal with a
special mission. QR intends to be a central element in the
continuing education of the ministry of the church.
In this mission, QR is recovering one of the oldest traditions of
the Wesleyan movement. Care for the education of preachers
and laity was an early feature of the Methodist societies. The
publication of Wesley's Sermons, The Notes on the New Testament,
the Arminian Magazine (1778), and the Methodist Magazine (1818)
provided continuing education for the ministry in the first
century of the movement.
We pride ourselves on living in a communications era. The
community of theological discourse and debate in early
Methodism was probably more highly informed than what we
have experienced in the recent past. Not that we do not have
access to a wider variety of resources. We do. But the focus today
is obscure. QR intends to become the critical element in linking
continuous learning and an informed profession.
Care for the learning and lore of the ministry and the
cultivation of new insights and effectiveness for the ministry are
the responsibility of the ministerium. That is basic to any
definition of a learned profession. Ministry, in this sense, is
dependent for its future upon the willingness of ministers to be
in continuous study, engaging themselves and colleagues in
critical debate and shaping theology and praxis for the church
together.
As a part of the recovery of the style of continuous education,
recording significant documents of the church's life for wide
study and use by the ministerium will be QR's responsibility.
F. Thomas Trotter is general secretary, Board of Higher Education and Ministry, and
Chair, QR Editorial Board.
5
Q R A D V A N C E EDITION, FALL 1980
Seminarians study such documents, but the general impression

is that such theological work closed with the Reformation
period. Most documents end in obscure archivesunheard of,
unread, uncriticized. The root sense of "recording" is "taking
more to heart." The ministry finds its vocation in Jesus Christ in
many ways, but it clarifies its vocation by sustained study,
conversation, and the forming of statements for wider debate
throughout the connection. It is our hope that QR will provide a
wider community of discourse on issues such as ministry,
ecumenism, interfaith dialogue, evangelism, ministerial disci
plines"taking more to heart" the work of the church.
Reordering the life of the ministry of the church is a goal of
QR. The journal will seek through its pages to enhance the
quality of ministry through preaching, pastoral care, adminis
tration, and the sacramental life. The editorial board seeks
substantive and extended commentary and debate. We are
confident that thumbnail reviews and topical paragraphs are
insufficient for the quality of study necessary for the vitality of
ministry in our period.
This is a joint effort of the Board of Higher Education and
Ministry and The United Methodist Publishing House. We
commend QR to bishops, ministers, laity, conference boards of
ordained ministry, conference boards of diaconal ministry, and
all others who sense the need to "unite the pair so long
disjoinedknowledge and vital piety." Out of this effort at
continuous education for ministry may come a glorious third
century of United Methodism.
6
HOMILETICAL RESOURCES
EVERETT TILSON
Each issue of Quarterly Review will carry an extended exegesis

of the Scripture readings named in the lectionary. The exegesis
will seek to bring the best thinking of biblical scholars to bear on
at least one of the three lections. The intention is not only to
provide fresh and recent thinking about the Scriptures for the
sake of sound preparation but also to offer models for
homiletics. The history of homiletical studies bears a twin curse.
Material is either too technical and obscure to be of any use to a
preacher, or it is a shameful spoonfeeding that does not nourish
the preacher but provides only a pony for the approaching
sermon. Here we hope the material can be useful and relevant,
and at the same time provocative for the preacher's future work.
Since this advance edition of Quarterly Review is being
distributed in the fall, the exegesis that follows centers on the
first four Sundays of Advent. Our attention is focused on the
Old Testament lection; however, the other readings are shown
to be pertinent and are treated briefly.
"Today's lessons emphasize the inseparability of God's pres
ence in our midst from God's rule over nations and in our
individual lives."
"To know God is much more to hold forth God's ideas than it is
to hold ideas of God."
"The Christology of the New T e s t a m e n t . . . is not a Christo-
logy of status in terms of divine claim, but of function in terms of
human service."
"Construed theologically, Immanuel ceases to be a sign of either
deliverance or destruction. He becomes, instead, simply a sign
of God's presence with us as God."
7
HOMILETICAL RESOURCES:
EXEGESIS OF ISAIAH PASSAGES
FOR ADVENT
EVERETT T I L S O N
F I R S T S U N D A Y IN ADVENT
1
Lections
Isaiah 2:1-5 Romans 13:8-14 Matthew 24:36-44
1 The word which Isaiah the son of Amoz saw concerning

]udah and Jerusalem.
2 It shall come to pass in the latter days
that the mountain of the house of the Lord
shall be established as the highest of the mountains,
and shall be raised above the hills;
and all the nations shall flow to it,
3 and many peoples shall come, and say:
''Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord,
to the house of the God of Jacob;
that he may teach us his ways
and that we may walk in his paths/'
For out of Zion shall go forth the law,
and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.
4 He shall judge between the nations,
and shall decide for many peoples;
and they shall beat their swords into plowshares,
and their spears into pruning hooks;
nation shall not lift up sword against nation,
neither shall they learn war any more.
5 O house of Jacob,
Everett Tilson is James R. Riley Professor of Old Testament at the Methodist Theological
School in Ohio and is the author of numerous articles and books, including Decision for
Destiny, Segregation and the Bible, and The Conscience of Culture.
8
come, let us walk

in the light of the Lord. (Isaiah 2:1-5 RSV)
Micah 4:1-3 is an almost exact duplicate of Isaiah 2:2-4. Verses

1 and 5 did not belong to the original piece, but were supplied by
a later hand or hands. Verse 1, which repeats the title of l : l , j W a s
added here to introduce the collection of oracles in 2:2-5:30.
Verse 5 quite possibly was written by an editor, who inserted the
oracle as a homiletical reminder to the people of Israel of their
obligation to reveal God's lordship over the future by their
quality of life in the present. However, few commentators
believe that either prophet borrowed this passage from the
other. Most interpreters trace its origin, instead, to an
anonymous Jew of the Babylonian Exile (597-539 B.C.E.).
If this view is correct, then our author, whoever he may have
been, faced radically different surroundings and attitudes from
those encountered by Isaiah and Micah in eighth-century Judah.
Both of these prophets had been confronted by complacent
optimism in the midst of conspicuous immorality. And both, in
turn, had met that challenge by heaping the threat of national
disaster on their charges of personal and political bankruptcy. In
their visions of ruin they had mixed figures of speech drawn
from descriptions of military upheaval with those borrowed
from accounts of natural calamity. But on the crucial question
they had left no room for doubt: the ultimate source of Judah's
judgment, no matter who its agent or the form of its
manifestation, was the Lord. In short, when Judah was
independent, Isaiah and Micah had confronted Judah with a
message which at that time in its life it needed to hear: The Lord
is Israel's Judge.
With the nation of Judah in shambles and its people captiye to
a foreign overlord, a drastic change overtook the mood of Je^vry.
Bleak hopelessness took the place of smug arrogance. Instead of
questioning their need of God, as their ancestors had been p p n e
to do, the exiles began to wonder if God had not abandoned
them. No doubt, their anxiety was aggravated by iheir
upbringing on the dogma of retribution. If their circumstances
accurately mirrored their relationship to God, as this teaching
inclined them to believe, what else could they do but despair of a
9
turn of fortune for themselves, for Zion, and for their world?
Our prophet-poet answers this inquiry in reassuring fashion.
He directs his people's attention to God's imminent appearance
on Mount Zion. Just as in former times the Law went forth from
Sinai, in the days to come the Law shall proceed from Zion. Then
Yahweh will teach Jacob (Israel) "his ways, so that we may walk
in his paths" (v.3 Jerusalem Bible). The contents of "the law" or
Torah are not explicitly detailed here, but the words "in the latter
days" (v.2) suggest both their significance and adequacy for the
conduct of the whole of life. (This passage clarifies the tendency
of some modern rabbis to speak of Judaism as "a way of life" and
to downgrade its significance as a system of theology.)
The words of our prophetic reading for the day date from
roughly the same time as those of Isaiah of the Exile (the
anonymous author of Isaiah 40-55, often called Second Isaiah)
and parallel that prophet's stress on the exaltation of the fallen
and the gift of the Law, the two key elements in Israel's Sinaitic
Covenant (a designation for the union of the traditions of
Exodus and Sinai). Assuming this stress to have been deliberate,
our author was inviting his fellow Jews to join him in the
contemplation of their situation from the perspective of the
original Exodus community. With this event in mind, the author
believed they would come to see that their situation in
Babylonian captivity was no more hopeless than had been that
of their ancestors in Egyptian captivity, and that the Babylonians
posed no greater hurdle for Yahweh than had the Egyptians. In
short, when Judah is in exile, the prophet confronted it with a
reassuring reminder which at that time in the nation's life was
badly needed: The Lord is Israel's Savior.
The inserter of verses 1 and 5 into the text of the Isaiah and
Micah collections may well have wanted to blunt these
eighth-century prophets' threatening proclamations. This likeli
hood is especially probable in the case of Micah, where the
oracle heralding Zion's elevation (4:1-3) has been placed
immediately after an oracle announcing the annihilation of Zion
and Jerusalem (3:12). Certainly there is no denying the fact that
oracles of judgment and salvation, sometimes subtly but just as
often curiously juxtaposing threats and promises, stand side by
side in Israel's prophetic literature.
10
Such a juxtaposition deserves serious contemplation at this

season of the year. It stands as a solemn reminder that the visit of
God in our midstour preparation for which is what Advent is
all aboutis much less predictable than that of Santa Claus.
Indeed, taking our cue from Isaiah 2:2-4, we would stress that
our commercialization and sentimentalization of Christmas are
the wrong way to set the stage for the appearance of the Lord. In
the Isaiah passage, where the Lord is portrayed as something of
a Santa Claus, the divine appearance is promised to a people
who are as helpless to go commercial as they are little disposed
to wax sentimental.
Significantly, the only ruler mentioned in the prophet's vision
is Yahweh. That is often the case in Israel's eschatological
descriptions. This explains the claim of many rabbis that
Judaism was more interested in the messianic era than the
identity of the Messiah. (The use of the definite article and the
capital " M " in this connection derive from Christian usage: The
Old Testament provides little textual warrant for this practice.)
The favorite Christian label for this time is "the kingdom of
G o d / ' but Rudolf Bultmann's followers, wishing to stress the
fact that emphasis belongs on the reality rather than the territory
of divine rule, substitute "reign" for "kingdom."
The ensuing description of the time of God's rule envisions
the conditions of paradise. Among other things, these include:
the restoration of Mount Zion, followed by its elevation to the
center of the earth (an Asian would doubtless have opted for
Mount Everest); the ingathering of the nations to Zion (though
Zion's central place in this account does reflect a certain
chauvinistic bias, it is sharply mitigated by the presenceac
cording to the Jerusalem Bible rendering of v.3of "peoples
without number" from "the nations"); the assembly of the
nations on "the mountain of Yahweh" to receive the Lord's
instruction (v. 3 JB); the abandonment of arms in favor of divine
judgment as the means of settling disputes between peoples and
nations (v. 4).
The Gospel lesson may have been placed here to counter the
notion (implied in Matt. 24:15-25) that the parousia will be
heralded by clearly observable and easily readable signs.
Matthew sounds the need for unswerving faithfulness in view
li
of the absolute unpredictability of the Second Coming. Three

examples describe its unexpected and startling occurrence. The
coming of the Son of man will be as surprising as (1) the flood
was to Noah's contemporaries (vv. 37-40), (2) the unannounced
parting of two co-workers, abruptly and permanently separated
from each other (v. 41), and (3) the burglary of one's home by a
nocturnal visitor (vv. 42-43).
All three of these illustrations foreclose the possibility of
eliminating the element of surprise from the advent of God's
reign. In conclusion Matthew says: "Therefore, you too must
stand ready because the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do
not expect" (v. 44 JB). Yet at the same time, the three examples
suggest the possibility of draining the element of surprise from
the Second Coming in its consequences for one's life. If we
would but join the ark-builders or the installers of a home
security system by making watchful preparation for the event,
then we could increase our chances of being ready and not being
left behind. But while the Gospel lesson is clear and emphatic in
vigilance and watchful preparation for the coming reign of God,
it remains quite vague as to what such preparation might
properly entail.
In our Epistle lesson, Romans 13:8-14, Paul compensates for
this deficiency with the command to "love your neighbor as
yourself" (v. 9). He gives specific content to this prescription by
putting "reveling and drunkenness, . . . debauchery and
licentiousness, . . . quarreling and jealousy" off limits for
believers (v. 13). But he does not leave the matter with this rather
tame bit of moralizing. In verse 11, Paul articulates the demand
of God on believers during the interim between Christ's first and
Second Coming, "The time," kairos, refers apparently to the
inauguration of God's kingdom in the life, death, and
resurrection of Jesus and "salvation" seems to point to the
second coming, since it clearly refers to consummation at some
future time of a development already in process. Paul then
radicalizes the Christian's earthly obligation by using metaphors
commonly employed (especially by the Gnostics and the
Qumran community) to indicate movement from one realm of
existence into another. Among the Gnostics and at Qumran,
these warring realms were the turfs of "spirit" and "flesh" or,
12
more commonly, "light and darkness." In this scheme, "spirit"

and "light" stand for the enlightened portion of corporate
humanity and its cosmic backers, and "flesh" and "darkness"
represent the corporation of rebellious humanity and its cosmic
supporters. The final outcome of this war has already been
settled in favor of the "children of light" and the corporation of
spiritual humanity, but individuals can only assure themselves
of a share in the fruits of this victory by shunning the works of
"darkness" (v. 12) and spurning the cravings of the "flesh" (v.
14).
Both the Isaiah and Pauline readings eagerly anticipate the
reign of God, but the Prophet and the Apostle differ in two
important respects in their treatment of this theme. Isaiah looks
forward to its dawn; Paul believes it has already dawned. And,
whereas Isaiah stresses its implications for society, Paul
emphasizes its meaning for the individual. But these differences
aside, they both abandon the indicative to leave us with an
imperative:
"Let us conduct ourselves becomingly," Paul enjoins, "as
in the day . . ." (13:13).
"O house of Jacob," the prophetic lection ends, "come, let
us walk in the light of the Lord" (2:5).
Each is saying to us, in effect, that the best wayindeed, the
only proper wayto prepare for the Advent of God is to live as if
the Lord had already come into our midst to launch the reign of
God.
For us Christians, of course, this "as if" becomes "inasmuch
as." For what is our gospel but the proclamation of God's
self-disclosure in the life and ministry, the death and
resurrection, of Jesus Christ? Therefore, inasmuch as our
preparation for Advent shall take place on this side of the
Incarnation, let us make ready for it by recognizing with Karl
Barth that in Jesus Christ "the realization of the good
corresponding to the divine election has already taken place . . .
so completely that we . . . have. , . only to endorse this event by
2
our action." Barth would have further reminded us that our
endorsement can only be at best an incarnation of the Incarnation.
And he would have warned us that, before even this can
happen, we must stretch our wisdom and imagination to their
13
Q R A D V A N C E EDITION, F A L L 1980
limits in the effort to bridge the gap that divides not only the first
century from the twentieth and rural life in the ancient Orient
from urban life in today's United States of America but also the
gap that separates Jesus' stance of "radical obedience" toward
God (Bultmann's phrase for capsuling our Lord's typical
response to God's demands) from our typically compromised
and compromising disposition to deity.
Today's lessons emphasize the inseparability of God's
presence in our midst from God's rule over nations and in our
individual lives. The first lesson spotlights the sphere and
substance of God's reign; the second, the radical character of the
divine demand on us in view of the imminence of God's reign;
and the third, the urgent need of actively witnessing to our
Lord's first coming by bringing our lives and our world into
conformity with God's will, instead of passively awaiting
publicly documentable signs of our Lord's Second Coming.
The three lessons might be used to remind us of the
substance, the summons, and the signs, respectively, of God's
reign. In view of the importance and the difficulty of adequately
covering the first two issues, the temptation will be to give only
brief attention to the third. But we should take pains, in view of
widespread preoccupation with and misunderstanding of this
last item, not only to address the issue of the signs of the coming
of the kingdom of God, but to do so with special care and clarity.
S E C O N D S U N D A Y IN A D V E N T
Lections
1 There shall come forth a shoot from the stump of Jesse,

and a branch shall grow out of his roots.
2 And the Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him,
the spirit of wisdom and understanding,
the spirit of counsel and might,
the spirit of knowledge and the fear of the Lord.
3 And his delight shall be in the fear of the Lord.
He shall not judge by what his eyes see,
14
or decide by what his ears hear;

4 but with righteousness he shall judge the poor,
and decide with equity for the meek of the earth;
and he shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth,
and with the breath of his lips he shall slay the wicked.
5 Righteousness shall be the girdle of his waist,
and faithfulness the girdle of his loins.
6 The wolf shall dwell with the lamb,
and the leopard shall lie down with the kid,
and the calf and the lion and the fatting together,
and a little child shall lead them.
7 The cow and the bear shall feed;
their young shall lie down together;
and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.
8 The sucking child shall play over the hole of the asp,
and the weaned child shall put his hand on the adder's den.
9 They shall not hurt or destroy
in all my holy mountain;
for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord
as the waters cover the sea.
10 In that day the root of Jesse shall stand as an ensign to

the peoples; him shall the nations seek, and his dwellings
shall be glorious. (Isaiah 11:1-10 RSV)
Traditionally, the second Sunday in Advent shifts attention

away from anticipation of the messianic era to preparation for
the Incarnation. These two emphases, however, belong
together in numerous messianic passages of the Old Testament.
This is especially true of the messianism that developed in
connection with the public ceremonies of kingshipcoronation
and/or enthronementin Israel and Judah.
Our prophetic lection for today makes the future experience of
the messianic era contingent upon the present embodiment of
its spirit and quality in this life. It brooks no separation of
prophetic vision from personal character.
To say this is of course to side with the bulk of modern
interpreters who recognize Isaiah 11:1-10 to be "messianic" only
in the sense that every monarch of the Davidic dynasty was an
15
3
anointed representative of Yahweh." By the same token, it is to
reject the view of older scholars, who read this passage as a
compensatory fantasy of Jews who sublimated their dreary life
in Babylonian captivity by painting word pictures of an idyllic
future. (Some of these older scholars construed the reference in
verse 1 to the Davidic dynasty as "a stump" to mean that since
nothing else remains of the royal tree of David, the monarchy in
Judah has fallen into ruin. This reading provided textual support
for their radically futuristic interpretation but the fact that geza',
translated "stump," elsewhere has the meaning of "trunk,"
"stock," "plant," or "stem," and that what we have here is the
suggestion that a healthy treethe Davidic dynastyhaving
trunk and roots, will sprout a new branch, the about-to-be
crowned monarch.)
Before proceeding to more substantive issues, two RSV
renderings call for a clarifying word. Comparing the RSV and
the JB, in v. 4 the object of the verb smite becomes "ruthless" (JB)
or "tyrant," instead of "earth," by the change of only one letter
in the Hebrew. This reading produces a case of synonymous
parallelism in verse 4 c-d balancing its antithesis in 4a-b. In verse
6 the "little child," which translates na'ar, should not be taken as
a reference to a mere babe-in-arms. It refers to any "marriage
able male so long as he is a bachelor" and may properly be
rendered " r e t a i n e r , " " a t t e n d a n t , " " s e r v a n t , " or "armor-
bearer." "Inexperienced attendant" would take us close both to
the meaning of the word and the sense of the verse.
The inclusion of verse 10 in this lection has often been
questioned. Inasmuch, however, as the implicit universalism of
verse 10 is by no means alien to the thought of Isaiah and is most
congenial to the Christian faith, its inclusion in our Old
Testament lesson for today is both liturgically defensible and
theologically significant.
Passages like this Old Testament lesson are known generically
as Dynastic Oracles (e.g., Isa. 9:2-7) or Royal Psalms (Pss. 2, 18,
20, 21, 45, 72, 89, 101, 110, 144), depending on the place of their
occurrence. They get their name from their concentration on the
king, his character, function, or rule. While they sometimes
reduce God to the size of the ruler's very this-worldly ambitions,
some of them are conspicuous for the lofty expectations with
16
which they challenge the king and, indirectly, his subjects as

well. In such "psalms," nowhere more classically illustrated
than in Isaiah 11:1-10, the king or "messiah" is called to embody
God's spirit and to enact God's will in the conduct of the affairs
of state. When Paul hails Jesus as one "who was descended from
David according to the flesh and [has been] designated Son of
God in power according to the Spirit of holiness" (Rom. 1:3-4
RSV), he is simply describing the king, almost any king, of
Israel, at the time of his inauguration or enthronement. To say
this is to recognize that such liturgies were vehicles for activating
both the king and his subjects' faith in Israel's destiny as the
agent and people of the Lord.
At this point the term "messianic" (i.e., "christological") calls
for definition. It refers to Israel's expectations of a king who
would bring to fulfillment all the hopes stemming from the
promises vouchsafed to the founder of the Judahite dynasty,
namely David. As long as Israel retained the monarchy, these
expectations centered in a particular historical king. After the fall
of Judah, the messianic hope sometimes took an otherworldly
turn, but Jewish messianism simply transferred the king's titles,
role, prerogatives, and functions to the Lord's agent of the
future.
Taking Isaiah 11:1-10 as an expression of Israel's hope for the
historical kingship, it is easy to see why the postexilic authors of
Israel's messianic hope for the distant future took their model
and cues from the writers of productions of this sort. The
preexilic authors simply foreshortened the messianic hope to
Israel's near future. Unlike the postexilic messianists, they
tended to look to an earthly rather than to a heavenly ruler. But
this distinction notwithstanding, postexilic and Christian
messianism is best viewed as a natural, if not always logical,
development out of Israel's preexilic royal hope. Evidence of this
connection may be found in the fact that the Dynastic Oracles
and Royal Psalms became a stimulus to reflection on Jesus'
significance as revealer and agent of God. Here we have
convincing proof that New Testament Christology roots in Old
Testament messianism.
The relevance of such passages for reflection on the meaning
of Jesus is further heightened by the fact that they originated as
17
theological projections of Israel's political destiny under God.

Therefore, rather than looking to particular kings for their
inspiration, Israel's prophets and psalmists looked to their
covenant with Yahweh. Consequently, they cast the king in the
role of mediator between the God of Israel and the people of
Israel. To them the king was at once both the steward of God, the
one through whom deity exercises sovereignty and bestows
blessing, and the representative of the people before God, the
one through whom they are made partakers of divine favor and
blessing. In the cult of kingship they symbolized this view of the
monarch as divine-human mediator by hailing him as God's
adopted son (Ps. 2:7; cf. Isa. 9:6).
The authors of these cultic pieces almost surely had in mind
some Davidic messiah on the historical horizon. However, the
influence of royal messianism on New Testament Christology
attests to the fact that Jesus' denial of kingship over a "kingdom
of this world" (John 18:36) was not construed by the canonizers
of the Bible to mean that our life on earth is not subject to the
reign and will of Christ (Matt. 7:21-27; 25:31-46). In our Epistle
lesson, Paul goes so far as to make the extension of Christ's rule
over the Gentiles contingent upon the harmonious living of
believers with their pagan neighbors in the spirit of Christ (Rom.
15:7-12). The Gospel lesson (Matt. 3:1-12) enlarges upon this
notion by demanding moral purification as a precondition for
membership in the eschatological community of which Christ is
king.
Our first lesson, like most of the Old Testament passages of
this genre, leaves us with many unanswered questions about
the occasion for its production and use, yet it presents us with a
clear understanding of kingship. This notion may be described
as messianic in character, but it is a messianism of function
rather than status. In order for the messiah to effect the social
transformation (enabling the people of Israel to live at peace
with one another and their neighbors) and cosmic transforma
tion (restoring harmony to nature and the nations) to whose
achivement his anointment as king commits him, he must first
undergo personal transformation.
Two developments fully justify our use of the Israelite king's
responsibility for this threefold transformation as a guide in
18
making preparation for the coming of God in Christ into our

lives and our world. One development is our democratization of
governmental duty. The other is our substitution of decision
rather than birth as our rite of passage for becoming people of
God. What we get by joining these two ideas is the suggestion
that, just as God and Jesus Christ may both be identified as
subjects of the Incarnation, God and you or I may both be seen as
subjects in our preparation for the coming of God in Christ into
our life and worship during Advent.
The prophet responsible for Isaiah 11:1-10, whether Isaiah of
Jerusalem himself or one of his disciples, did not develop his
view of this transformation from scratch. He drew heavily on the
traditions of Israel's faith in drafting his liturgy. His hope for the
future did not take shape around his faith in Judah's king. It took
shape, instead, around his faith in Yahweh, the King of kings,
the Lord of lords, the God of gods.
The significance of this fact can scarcely be exaggerated.
Especially if, as many scholars are inclined to believe, these
words were written by Isaiah for use in the coronation ceremony
for Ahaz in 735 or Hezekiah in 715. With mighty Assyria on the
march and Judah's neighbors choking one by one on her
imperial dust, how could any intelligent person have construed
the crowning of a king in Jerusalem to be anything more than a
foolish and futile gesture? For one, Isaiah could, and apparently
did, see something more in that action than a routine
celebration. He glimpsed the shape of a power with which
visiting, and probably mocking, dignitaries on hand for the
coronation of Judah's king had not come to terms. That power,
of course, was the selfsame power that had taken Pharaoh and
his brick-making slaves by surprise. As it was when Yahweh
first came into Israel's life, so shall it be, the prophet believed,
when Yahweh comes into Israel's life again; and Yahweh can be
counted on to do just that. And when that happens, as in former
times, Yahweh will crash the best-laid plans of people and
nations with revolutionary impact. Yahweh will wrench power
from tyrants and turn it into the hands of those who once
cowered before them. When Yahweh comes again, the exalted
will be debased, and the debased will be exalted.
Thus shall it be with the coming of "the Spirit of the Lord."
19
This divine appearance may be construed as a time and a

presence. The time is the day of reckoning when the powers that
be must give an account of their exercise of power in the
presence of Yahweh, from whom all power comes and by whom
it is transferred. Yahweh will bring together the kingdoms of
God and humankind, but this reconciliation will not come to
pass without human help. The prophet safeguards human
power and responsibility by hedging his promise with two
conditions: (1) that the covenant be put ahead of the crown; (2)
that public policy reflect the concern and compassion of the Lord
of the covenant. With these conditions clearly in mind, let us
briefly connect the prophetic demand, explicit or implied, to the
prophet's envisioned transformations.
1) Personal Transformation. Despite the surprise with which
God's imminent appearance shall take the neat calculators of
international affairs, the signs of God's presence will neverthe
less be apparent to the eyes of faith. The divine presence will
clearly manifest itself in both the character ( w . 2-3a) and the
reign of Yahweh's representative on the throne of David (v.
3b-d).
In verse 2a the prophet describes the king as the dwellingplace
of "the Spirit of the Lord." (The "fear of the Lord" in verse 2d-3a,
rendered by the Septuagint as "piety," is the source of the
traditional seven gifts of the Holy Spirit.) This divine spirit not
only bestows upon the king the qualities essential to discharging
the duties of his office, but it endows him with the wisdom, the
resolution, and the fidelity to conceive and do things that go
beyond the call of duty. Instead of focusing attention upon the
number or identity of spiritual gifts, the prophet highlights their
utter sufficiency for the king's performance of his duties. He
achieves this goal by noting that the king, in addition to
mirroring the divine spirit in his life (3a), continues to pursue its
implications in a mood of chastened but enthusiastic reverence.
Two of the gifts of the spirit, namely "fear of the Lord" and
"knowledge of the Lord," underscore the prophet's call for the
king's incarnation of the divine character. Here we need to recall
that the word translated "fear" can just as accurately be
rendered "awe" or "reverence." This explains the prophet's
summons to take delight in this gift. For surely it is easier to take
20
delight in him whom we revere than it is to take delight in what

we fear. And it likewise accounts for Isaiah's linkage of the "fear
of the Lord" to the "knowledge of the L o r d / ' Especially if we
pause to recall the dynamic understanding of "knowledge" in
Old Testament usage. Such knowledge is primarily subjective
rather than purely objective; it is more relational than rational;
and it is not purely formal but deeply and intimately personal.
To know God is much more to hold forth God's ideas than it is to
hold ideas of God. It is not merely to be aware of God's
purposes; it is to share God's purposes. In short, it is a form of
interpersonal communion in which we assert our independence
of other human beings by acknowledging our dependence on
God. It is that act of the whole self in which the human " I , " by
coming to feel and to love as and what the holy "Thou" feels and
loves, proceeds to enact the divine will into human deed.
This understanding underlies the prophet's designation of
the king as "Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting
Father, Prince of Peace." He is not thus designated because he is
king of Israel. Quite the contrary, he is thus designated in the
hope that he will develop a character to match the God in whose
name he has been anointed.
The Old Testament anticipates the diffusion of the divine
spirit upon all people in the messianic era. Since this age has
long since dawned for us Christians, it requires little imagina
tion for us to turn the prophet's claim for the king into a divine
summons for you and me.
2) Social Transformation. The test of the king's achievement of
the desired character will not be his private claim to a special
relationship to God, but his conduct of this-worldly business on
otherworldly terms (vv. 3b-5). In other words, the king's
decision-making process will mock this world's preoccupation
with the prejudices of Dr. Gallup's "Mr. Average Citizen." It
will scorn our definition of justice in terms of government of the
"ins," by the "ins," and for the "ins." And it will rebuke our
sanctification of the quest for personal advancement without
regard for moral principle or social consequence,
Isaiah carved out for the king a creative role in preparing the
way for God's appearance among the people. That role
committed him to unswerving labor for a just and merciful
21
society. Surely he would not, in this country with its

government of, by, and for the people, allow us to carve out for
ourselves any smaller role.
3) Cosmic Transformation. Another consequence of messianic
rule will be dissipation of the enmity both between nature and
humanity ( w . 6-9) and between nation and nation (v. 10). When
Yahweh comes to earth in the person of his "anointed" to usher
in the messianic era, peace will reign in nature and among the
nations.
Poetic license has undoubtedly entered into this too-neat
assimilation of the realms of nature and politics. Yet we must not
allow ourselves, in reaction against this oversimplification, to
neglect the potential impact of political actions on natural
ecology. Today, more than ever, it is imperative that we should
acknowledge this connection. For unless the peoples of the
earth take governmental action to preserve and restore the
human environment, the earth will exact its horrible vengeance
on our children for the neglect of their parents.
The late oracle in verse 10 may have been the special
contribution of a Jewish chauvinist, but it nevertheless attests to
the inseparable relation of Israel and all nations. More important
still, it attests to their common purpose in obedience to a
common sovereign. Indeed, granted the anointed's dependence
on the Spirit described in verses 2-3a and his exercise of power
portrayed in verses 3b-5, he could become "the rallying point for
the nations" without doing harm to him or themselves. In fact,
by thus honoring him, they would bring honor to themselves.
And they would proceed to order their affairs, as he has begun
to order the affairs of Israel, in accordance with the character and
will of Israel's God and theirs.
Read alone, verse 10 could serve as a prop alike for Jewish
pride and Gentile envy. However, when read in the context of
the preceding nine verses, both Jewish and Gentile pride pale
into insignificance before a greater glory, the glory of the Lord.
For when God comes in all his glory, human beings must cease
to glory in all that is theirs. Face to face with God's reality, they
can only repent and obey.
The whole of the prophet's and the Epistle lessons' teaching
about how to prepare for the incarnation is capsuled for us in our
22
Gospel lesson by Jesus' trailblazer, John the Baptist: "Repent,

for the kingdom of heaven is at hand" (3:2). "Bear fruit that
befits repentance" (3:8).
T H I R D S U N D A Y IN ADVENT
Lections
Isaiah 35:1-10 James 5:7-10 Matthew 11:2-11
The wilderness and the dry land shall be glad,

the desert shall rejoice and blossom;
like the crocus 2 it shall blossom abundantly,
and rejoice with joy and singing.
The glory of Lebanon shall be given to it,
the majesty of Carmel and Sharon.
They shall see the glory of the Lord,
the majesty of our God.
3 Strengthen the weak hands,

and make firm the feeble knees.
4 Say to those who are of a fearful heart,
"Be strong, fear not!
Behold, your God
will come with vengeance,
with the recompense of God.
He will come and save you."
5 Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened,

and the ears of the deaf unstopped;
6 then shall the lame man leap like a hart,
and the tongue of the dumb sing for joy.
For waters shall break forth in the wilderness,
and streams in the desert;
7 the burning sand shall become a pool,
and the thirsty ground springs of water;
the haunt of jackals shall become a swamp,
the grass shall become reeds and rushes.
23
8 And a highway shall be there,

and it shall be called the Holy Way;
the unclean shall not pass over it,
and fools shall not err therein.
9 No lion shall be there,
nor shall any ravenous beast come up on it;
they shall not be found there,
but the redeemed shall walk there.
10 And the ransomed of the Lord shall return,
and come to Zion with singing;
everlasting joy shall be upon their heads;
they shall obtain joy and gladness,
and sorrow and sighing shall flee away. (Isaiah 35:1-10 RSV)
Today's Scripture lessons highlight the themes of the mission

of God (Isa. 35:1-10), the Messiah of God (Matt. 11:2-11), and the
vocation of the messianic community (James 5:7-10). Together
these three pericopes witness to the inseparability of the divine
appearance and human preparation. This assumes, of course,
that God's appearance during this Advent, as in previous times,
not only will be restricted to the eyes of faith, but that it will be
confirmed by a unswerving demand for faithfulness.
Any one of these themes easily could inspire a whole series of
sermons. By proposing that all three be treated in a single sermon,
I am merely suggesting the need for special emphasis on the fact
that a common mission is the link that connects all God's
appearances throughout human history. For just as the Isaiah
passage defines God's mission on the basis of the Exodus and just
as the Gospel lesson implicitly identifies Jesus as the Christ from
his embodiment of God's mission, the Epistle lesson implicitly
claims that same mission for the Christian community.
The Mission of GodThe theme of this poem is the return to
Zion of the redeemed, on a luxurious highway. Carpeted with
blooming flowers in the midst of plush meadows and gushing
streams, it runs through a land that only recently was a barren
desert; its "burning sand" and "thirsty ground" have become
"pools" and "springs of water" (v. 7).
The imagery, the language, the background, and the outlook
of this vision bespeak the mood and reflect the circumstances of
24
4
Isaiah of the Exile. As noted earlier, the bulk of this prophet's
oracles are to be found in Isaiah 40-55. We may quite properly,
therefore, look to the activity and message of Second Isaiah for
clues to its historical and theological context.
The situations confronted by First and Second Isaiah scarcely
could have been more strikingly different. The audience of
Isaiah of Jerusalem was made up of people who believed that,
since Yahweh was on their side, they were immune to harm
from any historical foe. Isaiah countered this false optimism
with oracles of doom and judgment. The audience of Jerusalem
was made up of people who believed that, since Yahweh was on
their side, they were immune to harm from any historical foe.
Isaiah countered this false optimism with oracles of doom and
judgment. The audience of Isaiah of the Exile was made up of
people who believed that, since Yahweh had permitted them to
be enslaved by the Babylonians, they were as helpless as the
hopelessly handicapped: "the blind" and "the lame" and "the
deaf" and "the dumb." Second Isaiah countered this false
pessimism with oracles of hope and salvation.
Despite the radical disparity in the tone of their respective
messages, the two Isaiahs spoke from a common understanding
of God's mission and the mission of Israel. Both perceived that
aim to be the creation and dispersion of shaldm. Also, they both
construed the acceptance of this goal to entail commitment to
work for the transformation of human society into a just and
compassionate community.
When Isaiah of Jerusalem measured Israel against the
yardstick of this purpose, he found the nation as a whole to be
wanting. This discovery did not persuade him to revise his view
of Yahweh's mission but prompted him to rest his hope for its
achievement with a remnant (7:3), which his disciples turned
into the messianic bearer of Yahweh's promises (10:20-22; 11:11;
28:5). Afterward, Second Isaiah's disciples identified this
remnant with the servant of Yahweh (42:1-4; 49:1-6; 50:4-9;
52:13-53:12), whose work would effect the transformation
envisioned in 35:1-10.
Neither of these great theologians grounded his proclamation
in an analysis of his own situation. Both based it, instead, on the
Exodus tradition, with its witness to Yahweh's will and power
25
QR A D V A N C E EDITION, F A L L 1980
either to turn a highway into a wilderness for oppressors or to

turn a wilderness into a highway for the oppressed.
Both prophets blunted the role of human agency in this
transformation. We may use this fact as an excuse for debating
the point at which human activity ends and divine activity
begins, or vice versa. Or we may, following the lead of our
prophets, assess the mood of our audiences to determine just
the right mix of grace and judgment with which we shall
confront them in our proclamation of the coming of God into our
world. Once we have opted for this latter alternative, let us recall
the important corrective provided by each prophet's disciples.
For just as those of First Isaiah anticipated the achievement of
divine rule through a righteous remnant, those of Second Isaiah
looked to the servant of the Lord for its enactment.
The Messiah of GodThe Evangelist who gave us the Gospel of
Matthew assimilated the work of the Lord's servant (11:2-11)
into his portrait of Jesus as the Christ (1:1). Did Jesus himself
effect this combination? Or was it the work of his disciples, who
reinterpreted the meaning of messiahship in light of Jesus' life,
despite his adoption, apart from any messianic claim, of the
vocation of the servant of the Lord? The evidence for settling this
debate is contradictory and inconclusive; nevertheless, there is
no questioning the fact that the New Testament, almost without
exception, takes the recognition of Jesus as the Servant/Messiah
of the Lord as its point of departure for christological
speculation. In other words, the Christology of the New
Testament as a whole, no less than in the Gospel of Matthew, is
not a Christology of status in terms of divine claim, but of
function in terms of human service.
"The coming one" (ho erchomenos) in verse 3 is an obvious
reference to a messianic figure, even though we are unable to
point to Jewish texts in which it is employed as a messianic title.
Taking the narrative at face value as the transcript of an actual
encounter between Jesus and John's disciples, it may be
construed either as a reassurance to John (cf. Matt. 3:11) or as the
illumination for John's disciples as to the true meaning of Jesus'
messiahship. If one chooses to interpret it instead as a rhetorical
means of instructing the Matthean church on the true meaning
of Christology, the crucial question still concerns not the fact,
26
but the character of Jesus' messiahship. By the same token, and

no less clearly or emphatically, the Evangelist directs those for
whom the issue remains in doubt to seek their answer not in the
claims made by or for Jesus, but in Jesus' deeds. In reflecting on
these deeds the interpreter needs to bear these three facts
constantly in mind: (1) They parallel Old Testament descriptions
of the mission of God (Isa. 29:18-19; 35:5-6; 61:1). (2) They
provide the criteria for answering John's loaded question about
Jesus in our Gospel lesson; (3) They define our Evangelist's
requirements for admission into the kingdom of God, both in
this world (7:21-27) and in the world to come (25:31-46).
In summary, then, we can say that for our Evangelist, the
Messiah and the messianic community have a common
denominator in their recognition and acceptance of God's
mission as their own. Therefore, rather than waiting passively
for God's appearance among us as a bolt from the blue, he would
urge us to ask ourselves the "$64 question." What are those
obscure deeds that God in Christ is calling us to perform on
behalf of the oppressed and afflicted of our world, in this last
quarter of the twentieth century? To raise this question is to put
the burden of the messianic inquiry back upon us, as surely as
Jesus put John the Baptist on the spot by his answer to him. That
is to say, if I have read the Evangelist's mind correctly, when our
neighbors ask us concerning Jesus "Is he the one who is to come,
or shall we look for another?" our style of life should enable
Jesus to say to us, "Blessed are they who take no offense at you."
The Vocation of the Messianic CommunityThe Epistle lesson
(James 5:7-10) raises the question of Christian conduct during
the interim between God's first and second comings in Jesus
Christ. Quite clearly, the early church's anticipation of the
return of Christ to earth underlies the thought of this passage.
Yet its counsel of patience, especially when combined with the
prior threat of imminent punishment of the arrogant and callous
rich (5:1-6), implies God's manifestation in grace and in
judgment to the eyes of faith, even during the interim. For just
as surely as the rich, in effect, have rejected Jesus' brand of
messiahship, our Lord's faithful followers ("the brothers" of v.
7) patiently will reenact the "kind and compassionate" ministry
that he set in motion in Nazareth of Galilee.
27
All three of the Epistle writer's examples of patiencethe

farmer, the prophets, and Jobunderscore the inseparable
connection between means and end. For just as the prophets
and Job prepared for their climactic encounter with the Lord by
faithfully proclaiming God's word and diligently doing God's
work, the farmer prepares for the harvest by translating its
anticipation into deeds that will multiply its fruit.
If in the end the God who comes to earth will be none other than
the God who came to earth in Jesus of Nazareth, how do we
prepare for the Advent of that God? How else, all our Scripture
lessons for today move us to ask rhetorically, but by doing the
5
works of the One who became the servant of us all? Or, viewing
the matter negatively, how else but by eschewing the works
spurned by the One who became the servant of us all? (Matt.
6
4.1-11)
F O U R T H S U N D A Y IN A D V E N T
Lections
10 Again the Lord spoke to Ahaz, 11 "Ask a sign of the Lord your
God; let it be deep as Sheol or high as heaven." 12 But Ahaz said, "I
will not ask, and I will not put the Lord to the test." 13 And he said,
"Hear then, O house of David! Is it too little for you to weary men,
that you weary my God also? 14 Therefore the Lord himself will give
you a sign. Behold, a young woman shall conceive and bear a son, and
shall call his name Immanuel. 15 He shall eat curds and honey when
he knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good. 16 For before the
child knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land before
whose two kings you are in dread will be deserted. 17 The Lord will
bring upon you and upon your people and upon your father's house
such days as have not come since the day that Ephraim departed from
Judahthe king of Assyria." (Isaiah 7: 10-17 RSV)
Our three suggested lessons lend themselves equally well to

the observance of today either as the last Sunday in Advent or as
Christmas Sunday, if we take care to interpret them in light of
28
the entire books in which they occur. This proviso applies

especially to Matthew 1:18-25. Unless interpreted in light of the
Evangelist's other words about Jesus, this passage easily could
become an excuse for another sentimental sermon about Baby
Jesus and a further distortion of the Gospel, Not so, however,
when considered against the background of the Gospel writer's
entire work. From that perspective, it heralds the advent, as
surely as does Isaiah 7:10-17 or Romans 1:1-7, of a Savior who is
no stranger to pain. Read in this way, it joins the Isaiah and
Romans lections (even though these two pericopes cannot agree
as to whether the Savior's appearance will be as a pain-inflicter
or as the pain-afflicted) in summoning us for our observance of
Christmas, from the land of legend to that of flesh and blood for
our observance of Christmas. In short, when properly read, it is
a reminder that the focus of Christmas belongs not on the infant
Jesus but on the adult Christ.
The setting and thrust of the Isaiah lesson (7:10-17) are given
us in the preceding nine verses. In fact, the two passages are best
read as a situational and theological unit. They juxtapose word
(7:1-9) and sign (7:10-17) in typical prophetic fashion: The
futuristic signintroduced here by the words, "Therefore the
Lord himself will give you a sign," a slight variation of the usual,
"This shall be a sign unto you"is offered as confirmation of the
previously spoken word of the Lord.
Even though, as in this instance, the sign offered by the
prophet would not materialize until after the event anticipated
in his spoken word, its announcement is best construed as an
emphatic warning to the one(s) to whom he addressed his word
that it had better not go unheeded. Presumably, if the warning
were heeded, the sign would not be enactedhaving elicited
the requested repentance, the sign could, therefore, be
withdrawn. On the other hand, if the announcement should not
move its addressee(s) to obedience, the sign's enactment would
stand as a reminder to the prophet's audience that God's rule
cannot be sidetracked. If the announcement of the Lord's sign
should fail to elicit the obedience that would permit him to rule
in grace, the enactment of that sign would announce the Lord's
judgment on disobedience.
Isaiah's sign to Ahaz illustrates this salient fact: A prophet's
29
offer of a sign carries with it no option for its addressees

concerning the fact of God's reign. For better or worsethat is,
in grace or in judgmentthey are related inescapably to the
reign of God. The option has to do with the way their response
to the fact of divine rule affects the how of its manifestation. Just
as, by obedience, the respondents can reduce the odds against
their experience of God's rule as judgment, by disobedience,
they can lengthen the odds against their experience of God's
rule as grace.
The historical background of Isaiah 7:10-17 deals with a
situation of royal and national jeopardy (cf. II Kings 16:5-20).
The kings of Syria and Ephraim, who were spearheading a drive
to enlist all neighboring states as members of an anti-Assyrian
coalition, were marching toward Jerusalem, bent on replacing
Ahaz with a puppet king who would put Judah's military forces
at their disposal. His life and his throne were in grave peril from
those invaders, and the Davidic throne was in danger, as well.
The throne of Judah retained the title of "throne of David"
because of the expectation of messianic rule by a Davidic
descendant, springing from the promise to David (II Sam.
7:8-16) of an eternal dynasty. Therefore, Ahaz began assessing
his options. These included the possibility of an alliance with
that day's great superpower, Assyria, and this alternative
quickly became the odds-on favorite to win the day and the heart
of the king of Judah.
At this point Isaiah entered the picture to inveigh against such
an alliance, but he resorted to oblique tactics. He did not highlight
the possible dangersmilitary, political, and religiousfrom
Assyria. Instead, he resorted to sarcasm and ridicule in order to
downgrade the challenge posed by the Syro-Ephraimitic alliance.
Dismissing those nations' heads of state, Rezin and Pekah, as
"two smoldering stumps of firebrands" (7:4) who were incapable
of making good their threats, he declared, in effect, that the only
thing Ahaz had to fear was fear itself. Yet "his heart shook as the
trees of the forest shake before the wind" (7:2). As a consequence,
despite Isaiah's solemn warning that reliance on Assyria rather
7
than Yahweh would imperil his throne, Ahaz turned pleafully to
Tiglath-pilesor of Assyria, offering him tribute and obeisance in
exchange for protection (II Kings 16:7-9).
30
Though discouraged by this turn of events, Isaiah proceeded

to press his case by inviting Ahaz to ask for a sign from the Lord
that would confirm the prophetic word. When Ahaz spurned
this request, the prophet declared that the lands of Syria and
Ephraim would be deserted, before Immanuel, the name of the
child about to be conceived by "a young woman," could
8
distinguish edible from inedible food.
Despite minor chronological difficulties, much can be said for
viewing the wife of Ahaz as the enigmatic "young woman" and
her royal son, Hezekiah, as Immanuel. Since it promised the
continuation of the Ahaz dynasty after the demise of Syria and
Ephraim, the Immanuel sign may be construed as a sign of
blessing. But eventually, "The Lord will bring upon you a n d . . .
your father's house such days as have not come since the day
that Ephraim departed from Judah" (7:17). In effect, then, the
sign was nothing more or less than the promise of God's
imminent self-manifestation in line with Isaiah's prophetic
word. For just as Immanuel would attest to the prophet's correct
assessment of the threat from the Syro-Ephraimitic alliance to
Judah, he also would herald the fall of disaster upon Judah. In
short, his appearance simultaneously would vindicate Isaiah as
the faithful spokesman of the Lord's word and would set the
stage for retribution on Ahaz for his defiance.
For homiletical purposes this passage may be analyzed on two
planeshistorical and theological. At the historical level, it
easily can be reduced to a sham battle between the fear-ridden
and compromising institutional leader, Ahaz, and the faith-
intoxicated and uncompromising charismatic leader, Isaiah,
with the latter emerging, to no one's surprise, as the winner.
Unfortunately, life's choices rarely confront us with neat and
clear-cut alternatives: fear or faith, God or government, alliance
or no alliance, and so on. While the God of Christian faith may
be quite as unambiguous as these polarities would seem to
imply, nevertheless, we can never know God this explicitly.
It would be wise, therefore, to subordinate historical to
theological considerations in our interpretation of the Immanuel
sign. Construed theologically, Immanuel ceases to be a sign of
either deliverance or destruction. He becomes, instead, simply a
sign of God's presence with us as God. By the same token,
31
because of the infinite distance between God and mortals, he

also becomes a sign of the ambiguous character of all our
knowledge of God. The offer of such a reminder on the A.D. side
of the Incarnation may strike us as being strangely out of place. If
we are inclined to think so, we would do well to recall the apostle
Paul's confession of this limitation, both for us and for himself:
"For now we see in a mirror dimly. . . . Now I know in part" (I
Cor. 13:12).
The use of Isaiah's Immanuel sign as the point of departure for
interpreting God's presence in our midst is not without a certain
risk. However, considering the difficulty of turning it into a
support for the sentimentalization of Christmas, it is a risk well
worth taking.
The Gospel lesson (Matt. 1:18-25), after recalling the manner
of "the birth of Jesus Christ/' finds the Evangelist declaring,
All this took place to fulfil what the Lord had spoken by the
prophet:
"Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son,
and his name shall be called Emmanuel."
Many naturally assume, since the lines quoted by the Evangelist
come from the Greek version of Isaiah 7:14, that Isaiah predicted
the virgin birth of Immanuel and that Matthew's use of this
verse was prompted by the desire to affirm the virgin birth of
Jesus.
These assumptions fairly bristle with difficultiestextual,
historical, and theological. They rest on the Septuagint
rendering of 'almah as parthenos. Since the Hebrew word 'almah
means a young woman of marriageable age, without reference
either to her previous sexual activity or her marital status, would
not the prophet, had he wanted to emphasize the virginity of
Immanuel's mother, have applied to her the common Hebrew
word bethtildh, which normally refers to women who quite
clearly are virgins? In any event, even assuming that Isaiah
thought Immanuel would be born of a virgin, since he offered
his sign to Ahaz in confirmation of his prophetic word
concerning the disaster in store for Syria and Ephraim, it is a safe
assumption that he did not have in mind the mother of Jesus of
Nazareth. What possible significance could the birth of a child in
32
4 B.C. have had for Ahaz or for Isaiah's audience in the eighth
century B . C . ?
In addition to the linguistic and historical problems associated
with the traditional view, it presents a serious theological question
concerning the meaning of fulfillment. Was the Evangelist's
understanding of "fulfillment" confined to the use of the
catchword parthenos? That is to say, did he call Jesus Immanuel
because he was born of a virgin? Or did he identify Mary as a
virgin because she was the mother of Immanuel? Of course it is
possible that Matthew used this text within the original messianic
framework of meaning. In that event, it would have been the
Evangelist's purpose to assert that the mission of God, which
Isaiah believed Israel would accomplish through God's anointed
agent, Hezekiah of the Davidic dynasty, had at last been accepted
and embodied in Jesus of Nazareth.
Several considerations argue for Matthew's use of the
quotation from Isaiah in terms of this latter understanding of
fulfillment. Most important is his translation of the theme of
fulfillment into a theological dogma. On thirty-seven occasions
he introduces a citation from the Old Testament with a "that it
might be fulfilled" formula, but it is seldom employed only to
draw attention to some detail in Jesus' life that corresponds to
some Old Testament prediction. His purpose is far more
sweeping. It is to assert that the saving deed of God, begun and
carried forward in the history of Israel and told, retold, and
foretold in the Old Testament, has been finally and fully enacted
in Jesus Christ.
Hardly less significant is the fact that the Matthean pericope
itself simply swarms with indicators of the Evangelist's
assignment of top priority to theological, not historical,
concerns. The name Jesus is given to the child, "for he will save
his people from their sins" (in the Old Testament, God is
normally the subject of salvation). The child Jesus is "conceived
. . . of the Holy Spirit." Since, in the Old Testament, to ascribe
an action to "the spirit of God" is to claim God as the subject of
that action, Matthew's assertion regarding Jesus' conception can
have but one purposeto claim God as the subject of the life of
Jesus from its very beginning. Joseph's decision concerning
Mary is prompted by a communication from "an a n g e l . . . in a
33
dream"a typical agent and a typical medium of divine

revelation in the Old Testament. This explains Joseph's
readiness to do God's bidding, despite his uncertain status
before the Jewish law. Note, finally, how the Evangelist
introduces his narrative. It is to announce the birth not of Jesus
but " o f Jesus Christ."
These details fully justify the commonly held opinion that this
birth narrative, like the others, exudes the spirit of adoration. It
should be read, therefore, not as a report for the vital statistics
column of the Nazareth Weekly or the Bethlehem Chronicle, but as a
hymn of praise to the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Adam, and
Calvary. For it is not a piece of speculation about Jesus' life at the
time of his birth, but an affirmation of faith as to the meaning of
his life in light of his ministry and passion. If it may in any sense
be called an exercise in speculation, it is speculation about
Christmas, on the basis of Calvary.
So, for the Evangelist, the man from Nazareth (or Bethlehem)
becomes Jesus Christ. And his portrait of him becomes "The
Gospel of Jesus Christ." So he addresses himself to usas to all
his readersas an evangelist in the popular, as well as in the
technical ("writer of a Gospel") sense. Beginning with the
conviction that in Jesus, God has proclaimed his "good news"
concerning "the Christ" of Jewish expectation, he gathers,
arranges, and focuses the inherited traditions in such a way as to
turn his readers into disciples. In short, his motive for telling
"the old, old story" is not either to set the record straight or to
"get a load off his chest," but to win us to the recognition and
acceptance of the man from Nazareth as the Christ of God, in
whom the Lord of creation is at work for the world's
reconciliation unto himself.
This linkage of Jesus to the Christ marks Christianity's most
vital, and probably its most original, contribution to human
kind. Jesus fulfilled the messianic hope by standing the popular
messianic expectation on its head. Rather than emerging as a
swashbuckling military hero, marching at the head of a
trumphant army en route to the establishment of a kingdom in
which his followers would live in ease and comfort, Jesus joined
the human race as a crossbearing servant of God's mission to the
world.
34
Nowhere does Jesus' transmutation of the messianic hope in

the process of fulfillment become more apparent than in today's
Epistle lesson (Rom. 1:1-7). Instead of offering Jesus' Davidic
descent as justification for his designation as "Son of G o d / ' it is
presented as evidence of his humanity ("descended from David
according to the flesh"). Paul then completes the Christian
revision of the messianic hope in startling fashion. The task of
"apostleship," he declares, is "to bring about the obedience of
faith for the sake of his name among all the nations" (1:6). It is
not, as in the typical version of the messianic hope, to celebrate
Christ's victory over the nations, but to facilitate Christ's victory
"among . . . the nations."
Today's lessons successively proclaim the coming of God as
Judge (Isa. 7:10-17), as crossbearing Savior (Matt. 1:1-7) and as
apostle-sending Redeemer of the world (Rom. 1:1-7). They
underscore the fact that the stories of Christmas and Calvary
belong inseparably to the same Gospel. While they are no
guarantee that the sentimentalism of the season will not, as
usual, threaten the realism of the Gospel, they are our assurance
that we need not succumb to this threat.
NOTES
1. Readings here are taken from those developed by the Section on Worship, United
Methodist Board of Discipleship, and published in Seasons of the Gospel: Resources for the
Christian Year (Nashville: Abingdon, 1979),
2. Church Dogmatics, II 2. (Napierville, 111.: Allenson, 1936-69), p. 540.
3. R. B. Y. Scott, "The Exegesis of Isaiah," Interpreter's Bible, 5 (Nashville: Abingdon
Press, 1956), p. 247.
4. Cf. Isa. 41:17-20; 43:18-21; 44:3-4; 48:20-22; 49:9c-ll; 51:3.
5. See, e.g., Luke 4:18-21 or Matt. 25:31-46 for a cyptic summary of what this might
entail.
6. See the interpretation of this passage by Father John McKenzie, "Temptation,"
Dictionary of the Bible, p. 879. He encapsulates my unitary view of the mission of God, of
Christ, and of the church: "The episode describes the kind of Messiah Jesus was, a n d . . .
[the] kind of society the Church. . . is: it lives by the word of God . . . does not challenge
God's promises, and . . . adores and serves God alone and not the world. Jesus rejects in
anticipation the temptations to which his Church will be submitted/'
7. The apparent meaning of the prophefs Hebrew pun in 7:9 which, in JB, is
translated: "But if you do not stand by me, you will not stand at all."
8. Cf. 8:3 where, in a domestic parallel to this sign, Syria and Ephraim are threatened
with disaster before little Maher-shalal-hash-baz can cry "My father" or "My mother."
Scripture quotations noted RSV are from the Revised Standard Version Common
Bible, copyrighted 1973 by the Division of Christian Education of the National Council
of the Churches of Christ in the U.S.A., and are used by permission.
35
PASTORAL MINISTRY DURING ADVENT
ROBERT C. LESLIE
How do pastors, counselors, campus ministers, and other profes

sionals respond to the individuals and couples and families who come
to them for help? This section of Quarterly Review is designed to
stimulate reflection on the problems and crises that may grow out of
the cultural and religious situations described in the exegesis. Where
the preacher proclaims the Word pertinent to our historical situation,
the pastor and counselor provide personal support in ways required
by that Word. In this issue, the problems analyzed relate to the
Christmas scene. In later issues, the phenomena may not be so
peculiar to a time of year, but they will be relevant to the themes
displayed in the homiletical section. Quarterly Review will also
carry other essays from time to time that treat the task of the pastor
and counselor, not necessarily related to the lectionary.
Christmas is a time when the ordinary and the extraordinary

come together. Stars are ordinary enough, are visible every
night when the weather is clear. But a star that moves, that is
something else! A crowded inn is nothing new. Virtually
everyone has had the experience of trying to find a motel or hotel
late at night when everything is filled. But the hospitality of an
inn-keeper that turns a manger into a royal court, that is pretty
special. The arrival of a newborn baby into the world is
commonplace, although ever new and wonderful. But the
coming of a messiah as a little baby, recognized and
acknowledged at birth, is a truly extraordinary event.
It is this mingling of the ordinary and the extraordinary that
makes Christmas, and the Advent Season which precedes it, so
unusual. There are other seasons of the Christian year that loom
Robert C. Leslie is dean of the Pacific School of Religion in Berkeley, California. A

member of the California-Nevada Conference, he is the author of curriculum materials
and articles in United Methodist publications, and of several books.
36
PASTORAL MINISTRY DURING ADVENT
large in the Christian calendar, but there is no other season that

touches the heartstrings so directly or elicits such a personal
response. Christmas is a time when the opposites in life come
together in an unexpected and unpredictable manner.
For one thing, Christmas is a time when both fear and hope
are present. Note how often in the Advent Season the word is
"Do not fear." Whether it is the prophet declaring to those of a
fearful heart: " B e strong, fear not!" (Isa. 35:4 RSV), or the angel
saying to Joseph: "Do not fear to take Mary your wife" (Matt.
1:20), or an angel chorus declaring to shepherds keeping watch
over their flocks: " B e not afraid" (Luke 1:10), the message is the
same. "Don't be afraid," the message says, "because a great
event is about to take place that will bring hope into your life."
The point is not that fear is present throughout the Christmas
story, but rather, that although fear is present, hope is present,
too.
The paralyzing power of fear is well known. Who has not
experienced the sense of being immobilized in the presence of
an overpowering fear? Usually the fear is related to a sense of
personal powerlessness, as if resources for measuring up to the
demands of the hour are lacking. To feel inadequate for coping
with the problems of life is the commonest source of fear. To feel
ineffective in coping with a crisis is almost guaranteed to lead to
fear.
Some of the most helpful suggestions for coping with crisis
1
come out of a study reported in a popular article in Redbook.
This article is based on research by Gerald Caplan and his
associates, indicating that a small amount of supportive help at
the moment of crisis is worth more than large amounts of
therapeutic work later on. The study points to the need for a
community of support to stand by in the time of trouble. This
community does not need to consist of professionally trained
helpers but simply calls for interested people who will be
present in a caring way and who will encourage the talking
through of feelings. The particular crisis focused on in this study
was premature birth, but the principles that emerged apply to
any crisis. Where caring persons were present to help the
mother of a premature child talk out her anxiety, the crisis was
worked through with generally satisfactory results. Where no
37
supportive community was present to assist in talking out

personal fears, the crisis was not resolved and continued to
affect the family long after the birth. And this was true whether
the infant lived or died.
The need for a supportive community is especially present at
Christmas. At no other time during the year is the absence of a
caring community more obvious than at Christmas. At a time
when gifts of love and remembrance are being exchanged and
when greeting cards are being written and received, the
presence or absence of a community of support is felt with
special impact. Community mental health programs anticipate
an influx of patients during the holiday season, for when joy and
gladness are being accented on all sides, and especially in the
media, the absence of joy and the lack of caring persons stands
out with unavoidable clarity.
Psychiatrist E. Mansell Pattison, who heads a community
mental health program, writes that health and illness can be
measured in terms of the presence or absence of a supportive
community. People who exhibit a really healthy outlook on life,
who are happy and productive persons, ordinarily have a
network of between twenty and thirty persons with whom they
keep in close touch. Neurotic people who manage to live a
reasonably normal life but who suffer a good deal under daily
pressures ordinarily can cite ten to twelve persons as being in a
reasonably close relationship to them. Mentally ill persons can
come up with only four or five persons who are at all important
2
to them and who keep in touch with them.
Since most of us are extra busy in the Christmas season
shopping for gifts for those whom we love, and sending out
cards to keep our friendships alive, it is especially easy to
overlook those in our midst whose lives are empty and who
have virtually no community support. The rejection some of us
occasionally experience when there is "no room in the inn," is
for some a constant in their lives. Nothing stirs up personal
anxiety more than the feeling that no one cares. Nothing deflates
self-esteem and leads to personal fears more easily than a sense
that no one is concerned.
But the Christmas story does not stop with fear. Whenever
fear is mentioned, hope is mentioned, too, and the source of
38
P A S T O R A L MINISTRY DURING A D V E N T
hope is given. When the prophet speaks the words "Fear not,"
they are followed immediately by reference to God, "Behold,
your God will come" (Isa. 35:4). The angel's assurance to Joseph
is followed by reference to the name Emmanuel interpreted in a
parenthetical phrase as meaning "God with us" (Matt. 1:23).
The angel chorus was quite clear in the message to the
shepherds; "Glory to God in the highest" (Luke 2:4). Whatever
the source of fear, God brings hope into the picture. When Paul
writes to the Christians in Rome about finding hope through
Scriptures, his next sentence affirms God as the source "of
steadfastness and encouragement" (Rom. 15:5).
If the central story of Christmas is that God entered human
life, becoming incarnate in a baby, then the challenge of
Christmas is to make God's spirit incarnate in our life. If the
source of fear lies largely in a feeling of personal inadequacy,
and if a sense of inadequacy is enhanced by feelings of being
alone, then the real need at Christmas is for an obvious
supportive community, a community that makes God's love
very apparent in demonstrations of concern by very real human
beings. Hope comes to help offset fear when God's presence is
incarnated in ordinary relationships.
The hope that the Advent story points to over and over again
is not, however, a Pollyanna type of optimism. It is a hope that is
affirmed even in the presence of the worst kind of evil. In the
Christmas story the contrast is sharp between the presence of
darkness and of light, of evil as well as good. The figure of Herod
casts a dark shadow over the entire Christmas story. It is the
presence of evil in the Christmas story that makes it credible.
The Christian faith has never omitted the presence of evil.
Some power like Herod is always present, seeming to thwart the
good and to promote the evil. The Christian faith simply asserts
that evil does not have the last word. Wise men do find another
way to leave. Parents do find a way to slip away to safety in
Egypt. Those dedicated to God's purposes may falter and
stumble, but they are not stopped.
One of the strongest trends in contemporary psychology is an
emphasis on what persons can do to work out their own futures.
This emphasis stands in sharp contradiction to older more
pessimistic approaches in which the future was seen as largely
39
determined by past events. To be sure, the past does play a very

significant role. Both Matthew (ch. 1) and Paul (Rom. 1:3) note
the descent of Jesus from David, thus affirming the importance
of roots, but the current trend sees the past as having historic
significance but no necessarily determining influence. This
emphasis leaves a much larger place for conscious choice and
accents the power of persons to act in their own behalf. The new
trend results from the convergence of a number of different
approaches to personality. It has found popular expression in
ego psychology, in the development of Transactional Analysis,
commonly called T.A., as developed by Eric Berne and as
3
popularized by Muriel James. It was a central part of Fritz
Perls's gestalt therapy, and is a principle feature of Viktor
Frankl's logotherapy. It is Frankl's approach that we will deal
with in particular.
Victor Frankl knows the power of evil. As a Jew in Vienna
when Hitler marched into Austria, Frankl experienced the Nazi
horror at firsthand, being imprisoned in four different concen
tration camps over a period of two and a half years (it was my
privilege to be with Dr. Frankl in 1961, when he returned to
4
Auschwitz for the first time). One of Frankl's books takes as its
theme a song that was written in Auschwitz: "Say 'Yes' to Life in
Spite of Everything." That title describes Frankl's affirmation.
What really counts is not the evil that one experiences but rather
how one reacts to the evil. In every situation in life, no matter
how impossible it may seem, there is always the option of
deciding how to respond. Every person is free to make that
decision, and this freedom is present even though many have
been taught otherwise.
Frankl's optimism is based on his conviction that there is
meaning at the heart of the universe. His phrase is "ultimate
meaning." Our phrase is God. One can find meaning, even in
the most impossible situations, because of God. In the presence
of evil, hope is possible because of God.
The response of the wise men to Herod was consistent with
ego psychology: they decided to depart by a different way. They
acknowledged the presence of evil, recognized its awful power,
but made their own decision about how to deal with it.
There is still another contrast in the Christmas story. It is the
40
P A S T O R A L MINISTRY DURING A D V E N T
contrast between sickness and health, between brokenness and

wholeness. In Isaiah's prophecy of Zion's happy future, and in
Jesus' message to John the Baptist's disciples, the word is the
same. "The blind receive their sight and the lame walk, . . . and
the deaf hear" (Matt. 11:5; cf. Isa. 35:5-6). It is not by accident
that a message of health, healing, and wholeness accompanies
the story of the birth of Jesus. It is the testimony of countless
Christians that health of a new sort has come to them when they
adopted the way of life of Jesus Christ. The words of the hymn
"Amazing Grace" describe it very well: "I once was lost, but
now am found, Was blind, but now I see."
It is quite clear that Jesus considered healing to be a part of his
ministry, and that his disciples were sent out to heal as well as to
teach and preach. Among the healing miracles recorded in the
New Testament, none is more dramatic than the recovery of
sight. Yet this seemingly miraculous occurrence is well known
in psychiatric circles, and, indeed, in some periods in history has
been quite common. In the early days of this century when
Sigmund Freud was practicing medicine in Vienna, functional
blindness without an organic cause (termed "hysterical blind
ness") was well known. Such cases are rare today, but they still
occur.
I recall hearing a case discussed at a clinical staff conference in
a mental hospital where I served as chaplain. The patient was a
young school girl who was blind, but there was nothing wrong
with her eyes. The apparatus for seeing was there, but she
wasn't using it. She had no sight, but there was no organic
reason why she could not see. In psychotherapeutic explora
tion, however, the psychiatrist treating her discovered that
some years earlier she had witnessed her mother having sexual
intercourse with a man who was not her father. The experience
was so traumatic that she literally could not stand to see it. Her
resolution of the trauma was to blot out all vision, thus blotting
out what was too difficult to accept. With the help of the
psychiatrist, in the supportive climate of the mental hospital,
she was helped to re-live the emotion of the traumatic scene and
to integrate it into her life. When she was able to deal with her
mother's unfaithfulness to her father, she suddenly regained
the use of her eyes. Healings of this sort, called "miraculous" by
41
the lay person, are quite easily understood in the psychiatric

field.
One of the fascinating developments in the contemporary
world of medicine is a new appreciation of how body and mind
go together. Among some segments of the medical world,
especially where there is an openness to new ways of thinking
about health, there is a renewed interest in the field of
psychosomatic medicine. This is the branch of medicine
particularly concerned with how body and mind interact, with
how physical health is influenced by mental attitudes, and how
emotional states may cause actual organic illness. Among the
leaders in this current emphasis is Kenneth R. Pelletier, a
5
psychologist who wrote Mind as Healer, Mind as Slayer. Among
the many studies he cites is one by Dr. Lawrence Le Shan that
discusses cancer patients in the light of their total life history. In
making an intensive study of seventy-one patients with cancer,
Le Shan discovered that seventy of the patients had suffered a
major loss, either of a person or of a role in life, six months to two
years before the occurrence of the disease. His argument is that
the sensitive balance of the chemistry of the body that ordinarily
makes for health is easily upset by a traumatic experience of loss,
and that the bodily processes that normally make the organism
immune to disease, lose their effectiveness when an emotional
6
state of unresolved grief exists.
Le Shan cites the case of Linda, a teen-ager who was talked out
of going to college by her parents so that she could marry "well,"
the groom being a wealthy man they approved of. Her marriage
was not a happy one, and four children came along in rapid
succession to imprison her in nursery and kitchen. In desperate
unhappiness she sought to assert herself by having an affair, but
her parents and husband persuaded her to give up the other
man and be "enfolded once again within the claustrophobic
7
arms of her 'forgiving' family." Four months later she
discovered a lump on her breast and eventually had a
mastectomy followed by a hysterectomy since the cancer had
spread. She was told that no further treatment was possible, that
her cancer was terminal. At this point she sought out Le Shan.
Le Shan became her ally against her husband and her family.
He encouraged her to begin to live her own life, to take a
42
PASTORAL MINISTRY DURING A D V E N T
part-time job, and to start the college course she had always
longed to do. She eventually became a full-time student,
completed college, divorced her husband, and took a job as a
librarian. Le Shan writes: "Having discovered who she really is,
she is able to communicate that self and her needs to others. . . .
Every summer she travels to Europe and she has never felt better
8
in her life." Originally diagnosed as having terminal cancer, she
now has no symptom of disease.
It is the complex interplay of body, mind, and spirit that
especially interests Pelletier. Just as Viktor Frankl puts primary
stress on helping the patient to discover the meaning in his life,
so Pelletier stresses the role that the patient plays in sharing
responsibility for the healing process. A major new dimension
in medicine grows out of the realization that patients can
exercise a heretofore unknown degree of control over the course
of their disease.
NOTES
1. Redbook, January, 1962. See Vivian Cadden, "Crisis in the Family," in Gerald
Caplan, Principles of Preventive Psychiatry (New York: Basic Books, 1964), pp. 288-96.
2. E. Mansell Pattison, Pastor and Parish: A Systems Approach (Philadelphia; Fortress
Press, 1977).
3. Muriel James and Dorothy Jongeward, Born to Win: Transactional Analysis with
Gestalt Experiments (Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1971).
4. Viktor E. Frankl, Man's Search for Meaning (New York: Pocket Books, 1963). See also
Robert C. Leslie, Jesus and Logotherapy: The Ministry of Jesus Interpreted Through the
Psychotherapy of Viktor Frankl (Nashville; Abingdon, 1965).
5. Kenneth R. Pelletier, Mind as Healer, Mind as Slayer: A Holistic Approach to Preventive
Stress Disorders (New York: Dell, 1977).
6. Lawrence Le Shan, You Can Fight for Your Life (New York: Harcourt Brace
Jovanovich, 1978), p. 69.
7. Le Shan, p. 155.
8. Le Shan, p. 156.
43
UNFOLDING JOHN WESLEY
A Survey of Twenty Years' Studies
in Wesley's Thought
FRANK BAKER
We thought we knew him. We have heard about him, read

about him, spoken and preached and written about him. But no
biography has captured the man whole, even though the
first-rate biography is now becoming a possibility. For we know
more, much more, about John Wesley's work, his style of life,
his thought, than we did twenty years ago. And what is
significant is not only the biographical possibilities, but also the
remarkable growth in our knowledge of his theological
importance for the church universal.
During the past twenty years there have been dozens of
dissertations dedicated to Wesley's thought, hundreds of
books, monographs, and articles, and probably many thou
1
sands of paragraphs in sermons and addresses. Many have
brought new insights, so that Wesley students today may be
likened to biblical scholars upon the discovery of the Dead Sea
scrolls: with much enthusiastic research behind us, but with the
exciting prospect of much new knowledge ahead as the
technical experts patiently, tenderly, unfold the scrolls and
interpret the scrawls for us. In bold outline things may seem to
remain as they were in 1947 or in 1960whether we study the
Messianic hope or Wesley's views of sanctification. Yet
fragments of unfolding new knowledge are leading to minor
modifications, and these in turn are becoming major shifts of
emphasis.
One sight of the theological ferment of these last twenty years
is the presence since 1966 of The Wesleyan Theological Journal,
which has published more than a hundred studies of various
Frank Baker is professor of English church history at the Duke Divinity School, Durham,
North Carolina. Considered one of the most eminent authorities on Wesley and
Wesleyan studies, he has written From Wesley to Asbury and John Wesley and the Church of
England and is the editor of the thirty-four-volume Oxford edition of the Works of John
Wesley.
44
aspects of Wesley's theology, especially as that theology was

focused on the work of the Holy Spirit in human life. The
articles vary in qualityas do those of most journalsbut
most are well written and carefully documented; occasionally
they are of major importance. The fact that membership in the
publishing body, the Wesleyan Theological Society, is res
tricted by a conservative doctrinal testone, however, to
which Wesley himself would have had little difficulty
subscribingmay sound unpromising to many, but the
thousand members are drawn from many different denomina
2
tions, including both non-Methodist and non-American.
Perhaps an even more interesting phenomenon indicating the
way in which Wesley's theology has spread its influence over the
last twenty years, even in the Orient, is that the Wesley
Theological Society has its largest overseas membershipseveral
dozensin Taiwan, Korea, and the Philippines, with one lone
member in Papua. Most remarkable is the eager study of Wesley
in Japan, where there is no Methodist Church, but a very active
Japan Wesley Association. Carl Michalson claimed that of all the
younger churches in Christendom, the Japanese was "the first to
have developed a significant theology." Several of those whom he
singled out for their special contributions were nurtured on John
Wesley's insights, including the veteran president of the Japan
Wesley Association, who was brought up in the Holiness
movement, studied at a Presbyterian school, was graduated from
a Congregationalist school in the U.S.A., and went from there to
three German universities, but found his spiritual home in
Methodism. During fifty years of teaching in theological schools
and universities in Japan he emphasized as his constant motif:
"Theology without experience is empty; experience without
3
theology is blind"Wesley in a nutshell!
The development of Wesley's thought. It now seems somewhat

strange that until recent years there had been little attempt to
devote any close study to the fairly obvious fact that Wesley's
thought continued to develop throughout his life. Most scholars
seemed to assume that his mind budded, blossomed, and came
to full fruit in a day, or at least in a year. Those who realized that
he wrote no all-embracing systematic theology perhaps uncon-
45
sciously fulfilled their secret wish that he had served them better
by treating his theology at least as monolithic, with such phrases
as "Wesley believed," "Wesley taught," with no modifying
phrase about when he believed this or taught that. The obvious
assumption was that he believed and taught exactly the same
about everything throughout his long life as a committed
Christianand that that life began on May 24, 1738. Umphrey
Lee, in John Wesley and Modern Religion (chapter 5) warned us that
Wesley's post-Aldersgate experience was by no means without
its spiritual crises, and in chapter 8 that his theology also
changed as it matured, so that for Wesley, Christian perfection
was not only a doctrine of development, but a doctrine subject to
continuing development within his own mind.
During the last two decades, however, this assumption has
been strongly attacked. In particular much more attention has
been devoted to the "early Wesley," usually defined as Wesley
from his ordination in 1725 to his heartwarming in 1738. The
exploration of Wesley's youth and early manhood has been
made possible by the opening up of the British Methodist
Archives under the more liberal policy of Dr. Frank H. Cumbers
(book steward, 1948-69) and his successors. The first publication
to make extensive use of Wesley's Oxford diaries and related
documents was The Young Mr. Wesley (1961), by Dr. Vivian H. H.
Green, himself also a Fellow of Lincoln College, Oxford. This
volume remains of great importance in understanding the
religious and intellectual background of Wesley's decade at
Lincoln College, Oxford. Our knowledge of this period was
deepened and to some extent revised, however, by the more
detailed work of one of my own graduate students, and now my
valued colleague in the Oxford Edition of Wesley's Works, Prof.
Richard P. Heitzenrater. His dissertation was entitled "John
Wesley and the Oxford Methodists, 1725-35" (Duke University,
1967). His groundbreaking researches were greatly aided by his
discovery of a full key to some of the devotional notations in
Wesley's diaries in a parallel diary kept by his younger
colleague, Benjamin Ingham, Heitzenrater's work has at last
given us the true interpretation of some of Wesley's longhand
abbreviations, and also of some of his code signs, at which
Cumock and others had incorrectly guessed. Thus "rt" stood for
46
"religious talk" and "gt" for "good (i.e., useful) talk." For his
own spiritual guidance Wesley had developed two distinct
systems for denoting the degrees of his attention in prayer, one
by points, another by strokes connected with the letter " p , " so
that he was able to maintain an hourly chart of the readings on
his spiritual thermometer, ranging from "fervent," "attentive,"
4
"indifferent," down to "cold," or even "dead in prayer,"
An influential study of Wesley's theological development
during the years leading to and including his "conversion" in
1738, by Martin Schmidt, first appeared in German in 1953, but
did not make a major impact until its translation into English in
1962 as John Wesley: A Theological Biography. This not only traced
carefully the literary sources of his developing thought, but used
more fully than had been done hitherto the relevant German
documents available both in Herrnhut, Halle, and elsewhere.
Volume 2 (published in English in two parts in 1972 and 1973) is
less important, mostly covering familiar territory, though it is
interesting to read a German scholar's summary of Wesley's
theological output: "One perceives a similarity to Martin
Luther. . . . The outstanding characteristic of every writing is its
conversational style. Wesley needed the other partywhether
it was someone who wished for instruction, advice, and
encouragement from him, or an opponent who provoked him
by affronting Christian truth, or the Societies which called for
guidance from him, support through him, or advocacy by
5
him."
More research on Wesley's early manhood and ministry are
just over the horizon. Wesley's early letters (1721-39), including
outstanding selections from both letters written to him and by
him, have now been made available in volume 25 of the Oxford
Edition of Wesley's Works, a massive volume in which his
mother's great influence upon him may be traced, in exchanges
which emphasize not only her pastoral sensitivity and
shrewdness but her down-to-earth theological acumen. This
undoubtedly gave substance to much of his later teaching, but
also helped to form his whole approach to doctrinal questions.
The early diaries (elucidated by Dr. Heitzenrater) will be made
fully available in a few years, along with much fuller transcripts
from the handful of his early manuscript journals, in volume 18
47
of the Oxford Edition. The early manuscript sermonsmore

than had originally been thought, because some of them are
available only in transcriptions made by Charles Wesley for his
own usehave been edited by Prof. Albert C. Outler, and will
appear in volume 4 of the Sermons, preceded by an appraisal of
the whole corpus of sermons in volume 1, which should be
published in 1982. Wesley's early manuscript devotional
manual should appear in volume 8, and other volumes of the
new edition will be enriched by, and will themselves enrich, our
knowledge of the hitherto almost unknown early Wesley. Then
we shall be able to assess more clearly how the first decade and a
half of his ministry furnished his retentive mind with a thousand
quotations from the classics, the Fathers, the poets, laid the
foundations of his theology, and served as a testing ground for
his developing spirituality and pastoral practice.
One of the most interesting aspects of John Wesley's thought,
even after his life's work within the Church and Methodism had
received new direction and power as he was approaching
thirty-five, was its continued fluidity. He was constantly gaining
new impressions and insights and formulating new ideas and
experiments, both from his varied experiences and his
omnivorous reading. This continued unabated into old age
witness his letter encouraging William Wilberforce in his fight
against slavery, citing (clearly as the immediate cause of the
letter) the words of a black slave, Gustavus Vassa, to whose
recently published biography Wesley had himself subscribed
and which he had read that morning, a week before his death at
the age of eighty-seven. Wesley suffered from physical
impairments, and his memory was never too reliable; yet
instances of his mental alertness abound.
With something of the original glow of his greatly enriched
spiritual experience of 1738 clinging about him, in 1740 Wesley
had published the first two extracts from his Journal, in which he
claimed that until May 24,1738, he had not been a Christian and
had had no faith. Thirty years later he realized not only that he
had greatly overstated his case, but that he ought to set the
record straight, which he did in his early seventies. The gist of
what he said in revision was that he had been correct in a
measure only, not having been a Christian in the full sense of the
48
word, because he had only the faith of a servant, not that of a

6
son. John Allan Knight wrote of "Aspects of Wesley's Theology
after 1770"when Wesley was sixty-sevenmaintaining that
the first subtle step in Methodist teaching from an emphasis on
free grace to one on free will was made late in life by Wesley
himself, rather than posthumously by his followers, and traced
its causes in the growing affluence of Methodism, Wesley's
growing fear of antinomianism in the Calvinist controversy over
the 1770 Minutes, and the great influence over him of John
7
Fletcher, his protagonist in that controversy. A decade earlier
the debate over Christian perfection with his brother, and the
need to safeguard Methodism against "enthusiasm"the other
wing of the danger of emphasizing faith to the exclusion of
workshad caused Wesley to modify his views on that
doctrine.
In his new edition of Wesley's Sermons, Albert Outler shows
that volume 4 of Wesley's Sermons on Several Occasions (1760) in a
sense marked the high point of the "mature" Wesley, and that
from that time onward a number of changes took place in his
thought, so that volumes 5-8 (collected 1787-88), and most of
them written in Wesley's eighties) contain many new emphases.
Summing this up he states in his Introduction:
[His last twenty years] was a time of still further theological

maturation, especially in the development of his views of Christian
praxis. It is as if, after laying the firm foundations of his soteriology,
Wesley had set himself to work out its practical consequenceswith
out weakening any of those foundations. . . . [These later volumes]
reveal new, and some fresh, facets of Wesley's mind and heart, and
lend further complications to any explanation of his role as
folk-theologian. . . . There are sermons here to fortify and edify
believers in the face of new challenges to historic Christian doctrine
from Enlightenment scepticism and secularism. There is ammunition
here for the Methodists in their protracted debates with the Calvinists
8
on one flank, and Anglican traditionalists on the other.
Theological themes in recent Wesley study. Although the early and

late emphases of Wesley are important, they are differences in
emphasis rather than in basic content, and it remains useful to
deal with the themes which Wesley expounded during his
mature middle years, or upon which there seem to have been
49
few changes of emphasis. Most serious students today,

however, know better than to treat them without being alert for
some development in his thought. Books, monographs, and
dissertations have continued to illuminate varied themes during
the last two decades. One of the most valuable monographs was
by a distinguished Roman Catholic scholar, Father Jean Orcibal
of the Sorbonne, Paris, translated for A History of the Methodist
Church in Great Britain, vol. 1 (ed. Rupert Davies and Gordon
Rupp, 1965, pp. 83-111) as The Theological Originality of John
Wesley and Continental Spirituality. Father Orcibal outlines
Wesley's debt to the Roman Catholic mystics throughout his
life, especially in his early years, not only in his personal
devotions and spiritual quest, but in his pastoral and publishing
activities. The impact of this study and others (such as John M.
Todd's John Wesley and the Catholic Church, 1958; and Robert G.
Tuttle, Jr., John Wesley: His Life and Theology, 1978) have filled out
our knowledge of Wesley as a Christian who drew upon the
spiritual resources of the Roman Catholic Church to a
remarkable degree, even while he kept up his attacks upon what
he considered the flaws in its institutional character. Roman
Catholic contributions to the study of Wesley's theology
continue, and the publication in 1968 of Wesley's Letter to a
Roman Catholic, edited by Michael Hurley, S.J., was hailed as "an
important ecumenical event." Noteworthy also for what he had
to say as well as for the company in which he said it was Father
Hurley's paper on "Salvation Today and Wesley Today" in a
9
Wesley symposium at Drew in 1974.
In the same History of the Methodist Church in Great Britain (pp.
147-79), Rupert Davies issued the caveat that in accepting the
fact that Wesley was no systematic theologian of the order of
Aquinas and Calvin, who alike endeavored to systematize the
whole realm of Christian doctrine, he was in fact a redoubtable
systematic theologian in that area which he made peculiarly his
own, the processes of human salvation. Even though this
theology was undertaken in order to introduce Christians to a
living experience of God, and found confirmation in that
experience, it was neither subjective nor speculative in
character, but avowedly and fundamentally biblical. This forms
the whole background of what Methodists are taught to think of
50
as "our doctrines": the loss of the image of God through original

sin, baptismal regeneration, the new birth, justification by grace
through faith, the Christian assurance of salvation through the
witness of the Holy Spirit, and the pursuit and realization of
Christian perfection as the final stage of the way of salvation.
Not that "our doctrines" belonged only to the people called
Methodists, of course, but their founder made them his peculiar
study, not simply as a matter of interesting theological
speculation, but of the life or death of the soul. Through all
stages of his life he worked and reworked these themes, testing
them by the light of reason and experience and new
interpretations of the Bible itself.
Much pioneer work had been done on major aspects of
Wesley's soteriological system during the previous quarter of a
century, including volumes by W. B. Cannon and Franz
Hildebrandt on justification; A. S. Yates on Christian assurance;
and Newton Flew, W. E. Sangster, and Harald Lindstrom on
sanctification. During the last two decades more creative
research has focused on other neglected themes related to this
same general evangelical concern.
The period began with a study of Wesley's soteriological
summa (and a little more) by Colin W. Williams, entitled John
Wesley's Theology Today (1960). This dealt succinctly and boldly
with this pragmatic core against the backdrop of the ecumenical
movement. In the same year came a more detailed volume,
Wesley's Christology, by John Deschner, on a neglected aspect of
Wesley's thought. In a thoroughgoing attempt to recapture the
presuppositions on Christ as Prophet, Priest, and King which
inspired and infused Wesley's preaching on salvation, Deschner
made much fuller and more fruitful use of his Explanatory Notes
upon the New Testament than has been customary among
students of his thought.
Lycurgus M. Starkey offered a useful contribution toward
filling a major gap in The Work of the Holy Spirit: a Study in
Wesleyan Theology (1962), but much remains to be done in this
10
important area. A. Skevington Wood dealt much more with
the methods than the theology of evangelism in The Burning
Heart: John Wesley, Evangelist (1967), just as W, Lamplough
Doughty had scarcely mentioned theology in John Wesley,
51
Preacher (1955). A valuable specialized study which carefully

showed the development from Wesley's early to his later views
was done by Charles A. Rogers"The Concept of Prevenient
Grace in the Theology of John Wesley" (Duke, 1967)now
planned for publication after both pruning and broadening in
scope. Another valuable study of a somewhat larger area was by
John C. English, "John Wesley's Doctrine of Christian Initia
tion" (Vanderbilt, 1965), of which a precis was published in The
Wesleyan Quarterly Review for May-August, 1967. This also dealt
with three periods of thought, those of "the young Mr. Wesley,"
of Wesley under the influence of the Moravians, and of the
mature Wesley.
The whole field of church, ministry, and sacraments has been
explored as fully during this period as the major evangelical
themes were during the preceding decades. One of the lasting
results of the Oxford Theological Institute, organized periodical
ly at Lincoln College, Oxford, under the auspices of the World
Methodist Council, was the publication under the editorship of
Dow Kirkpatrick of a distinguished book of essays under the title
The Doctrine of the Church (1964). The list of contributors (listed in
order of their appearance) is as remarkable for its high quality as
for its variety of attainment: Albert C. Outler, C. H. Dodd, C. K.
Barrett, E. Gordon Rupp, Robert E. Cushman, Herbert J. Cook,
Philip S. Watson, A. Raymond George, Gerald O. McCulloh,
Frederic Greeves, and F. Thomas Trotter. In the same year Rex
Kissack issued a penetrating study entitled Church or No Church?
The development of the concept of Church in British Methodism. In
1968 Frederick Hunter published John Wesley and the Coming
Comprehensive Church, showing Wesley's ecclesiastical debt to
many sources, especially the Non-jurors, but also to the
Independents and Presbyterians/ and his constant stress on the
need for unity among all Christians. In much greater detail in
1970,1 attempted an "ecclesiastical biography," tracing both the
theological changes in Wesley's churchmanship and the
successive steps which led him to an unavowed but apparently
inevitable breach with the Church of England. In this a chapter
was devoted to Wesley's views on the ministry, on which a
major work was written by A. B. Lawson in 1962John Wesley
and the Christian Ministry: the sources and development of his opinions
52
and practice. On the sacraments the slight work of John R. Parris,

John Wesley's Doctrine of the Sacraments (1963), was far outclassed
by Ole E. Borgen, John Wesley on the Sacraments: A Theological
Study (1972). Baptism in Early Methodism (1970), by Bernard G.
Holland, contains the fullest survey of Wesley's thought and
practice in this field of inquiry, where Wesley's own strong
views have failed to be transmitted to his followers, A
thoughtful contribution to the ecumenical debate is Franz
Hildebrandt, I Offered Christ (1964), subtitled "A Protestant
Study of the Mass," in which he shows how close to the Roman
Catholics were both of the Wesley brothers in their conception of
the Lord's Supper as a sacrificeand the promises and
challenges that this fact holds.
Other aspects of Wesley's thought, less directly related to the
way of salvation, have been engaging more attention, including
the avowed source of that teaching, the Bible. In 1974 Thorvald
Kallstad published a doctoral dissertation for the University of
Uppsala entitled John Wesley and the Bible. The subtitle, however,
"A Psychological Study," shows that this is not quite what at
first it seems. Dr. Kallstad proposed to study Wesley's thought
and personality in the framework of the psychology of religion,
and especially of the psychological "role theory" worked out by
Hjalmar Sundem, claiming that Wesley was unconsciously
acting out a variety of biblical roles in his relationship with God,
so that the chief frame of reference governing his life was the
Bible. More conventional, but perhaps more illuminating in
some ways, is a dissertation by Robert Michael Casto (Duke,
1977), entitled, "Exegetical Method in John Wesley's Explanatory
Notes upon the New Testament: A description of his approach, use
of sources, and practice."
Over thirty dissertations on Wesley's thought have been
completed since 1960, and the titles of a few others emphasize
the diversity of themes:
"Eschatological Doctrines in the Writings of John and Charles
Wesley" (J. C. T. Downes, Edinburgh, 1960).
" A Study in Theology and Social Ethics" (A. Lamar Cooper,
Columbia, 1962).
"The Moral Teachings of John Wesley" (F. J. McNulty, Catholic,
1963).
53
"The Atonement in the Theology of John and Charles Wesley"

(J. R. Renshaw, Boston, 1965).
"The Moral Philosophy of John Wesley" (T. G. Hoffman,
Temple, 1968).
"Gregory of Nyssa and John Wesley in Theological Dialogue on
the Christian Life" (R. S. Brightman, Boston, 1969).
"The Christian Anthropology of John Wesley" (M. J. Scanlon,
Catholic, 1969).
"The Nature of Evangelism in the Theology and Practice of John
Wesley" (A. L. Boraine, Drew, 1969).
"The Problem of Church and State in the Thought of John
Wesley, as reflecting his Understanding of Providence and his
View of History" (G. B. Hosman, Drew, 1970).
One of the most important published works, which at first may
seem peripheral, is The Methodist Revolution (1973) by Bernard
Semmel. E. P. Thompson, reacting against the blind denomina
tional triumphalism of some of Wesley's biographers, had
crystallized the view that Wesley's preachers and societies had
headed a reactionary social movement because their theology was
muddled and repressive, a faint shadow of the sturdy democracy
11
of the old Dissenters. Against this Semmel argues, with
theological as well as sociological acumen, that Methodist
teaching was "much more decidedly liberal and progressive than
that of Calvinism. . . . The Revival was, indeed, a revolution
undeniable on a spiritual and in all likelihood on a social level as
welland was so understood by both Methodists and their
opponents" (p. 5). He seeks to demonstrate that Wesley's tedious
doctrinal controversies with the antinomians constituted in fact
the formuation of the charter of the Methodist revolution, a
synthesis of liberalism, order, and mission.
Seeing Wesley whole. A Colossus towering over all others

throughout this period, however, has been Albert C. Outler, of
Perkins School of Theology. His volume John Wesley, in the
Library of Protestant Thought (1964), furnished the best
theological anthology of Wesley, and gave us the term which
most aptly describes him"a /o/fc-theologian: an eclectic who
had mastered the secret of plastic synthesis, simple profundity,
the common touch" (p. 6). The masterly introduction to this
54
volume is a sumtna of Wesley's theology which Outler has

repeated frequently in varying terms and from different
perspectives throughout the intervening years, with the
enrichment of continuing research into Wesley's sources. He
has proved far and away the most captivating and compelling
protagonist of Wesley's unique importance as a theologian and
exponent of the components of that importance. Nor has this
been confined to academic and Methodist circles, whether
national or international, but Albert Outler has been respected
as the Methodist theologian par excellence both in Vatican II and
the World Council of Churches. At the "Consultation" of
Wesley scholars at Drew in 1974, he delivered the most
impressive address, on the theme of that gathering, "The Place
of Wesley in the Christian Tradition," On this occasion he
expounded a low-key definition of Wesley's status as "the most
important Anglican theologian of the eighteenth century
because of his distinctive composite answer to the age-old
1 2
question as to 'the nature of the Christian life,' " and
concluded: "The old disjunction between 'evangelical' and
'catholic' is no longer a fruitful polarity, and the only conceivable
Christian future is for a church truly catholic, truly evangelical,
and truly reformed. John Wesleyan evangelist with a catholic
spirit, a reformer with a heroic vision of the Christian life created
by faith matured in love, a theologian who lived in and thought
out of the Scripture and Christian tradition, and who brought all
his judgements to the bar of experience and reasonthis Wesley
offers a treasure to the church of tomorrow that will leave it the
13
poorer if ignored."
Over the past decade and more, Outler's main task has been
the exposition of the main depository of Wesley's theological
thought, his Sermons, which should begin publication in 1982,
and will comprise the first four of the thirty-four volumes in the
Oxford Edition of Wesley's Works, of which he was one of the
chief architects.
The main impetus behind this whole formidable editorial
undertaking was frankly theological, even though most of the
volumes do not appear to be theological literature. The Oxford
Edition will without question furnish the major instrument for
the understanding of Wesley's many-sided approach to his
55
constant theme of man's recovery of the image of God in the

arena of this world. So far there are available volume 11,
Wesley's Appeals to Men of Reason and Religion, one of a group of
more obviously doctrinal writings, edited by the late Gerald R.
Cragg, and volume 25, the first of seven volumes of his Letters to
be edited by mein this case those of 1721-39, demonstrating
(among many other things) much of his early theological quest,
and especially the remarkable influence of his mother, herself a
"folk-theologian" before her son. In the press are volume 26, the
letters for 1740-55, including Wesley's complete correspon
dence with "John Smith," and volume 7, A Collection of Hymns
(1780), edited by Franz Hildebrandt (another of the founders of
the project), Oliver Beckerlegge, and James Dale.
Of the thirty-four volumes, three will contain little direct
doctrinal commentary or elucidation, the Bibliography (vols.
32-33) and the General Index (vol. 34)although their indirect
importance in the undertaking is obvious. Every other volume,
however, will offer some unique contribution to our knowledge
of Wesley's thought. It is important to recognize that because
Wesley did not set out to compile a complete theological system
he wrote few avowedly theological treatises. Theology became
for him the handmaid of evangelism and Christian nurture. If
you seek his theological monument, therefore, you mustlike
those who seek Christopher Wren's monument in St. Paul's
14
"look around y o u . " All his writings constitute his theological
monument: the sermons, the translation of and explanatory
notes upon the New Testament, the hymnbook, the apologiae
for Methodism, the Minutes of his conferences (especially the
early ones), his controversial pamphlets, his pastoral writings,
even his varied attempts to improve the health and mental
equipment of his followersevery volume reveals some explicit
doctrinal statement, as well as much that is implicit. His Sermons
for Several Occasions tailored doctrinal truth to human occasions.
Similarly in his Journal, in his personal letters, in brief articles for
his Arminian Magazine, we light upon some of his more cogent
doctrinal teaching. He was an occasional theologianimplying
by that, of course, not a dilettante, but one who instinctively
brought his profound thinking about God to bear on every
human experience of every day; he was, in fact, a perpetual
56
theologian. The process of theological writing for Wesley,

indeed, was never a matter of reflecting in a kind of intellectual
vacuum, but of reacting to human events, human criticisms,
human needs, human opportunities. It is all the more important
to trace and analyze those occasions, to discover more about the
sources which prompted the embryonic ideas which he
developed and filled out, and which were eventually woven into
the tapestry depicting in ever richer hues Wesley's view of the
life of God in the soul of man.
This is the kind of Wesley that the editors of this project see,
and to whose fleshing out they dedicate their arduous labours in
15
securing a definitive text and explication of his writings. The
results of this study of thousands of manuscripts, this collation
of thousands of editions of five hundred Wesley publications
large and small, will be many corrections, many conjectural
emendations, making some sense out of what has hitherto
remained nonsense, or (more frequently) better sense out of
what was poor sensefor Wesley was too busied about his
primary task to give adequate care to his publications, and was
frequently served poorly by his copy editors, his printers, and
his proofreaders. The total volume of major change, however,
will be comparatively small. The really important thing will be
that at last we shall be assured that we have (as near as is
humanly possible) the exact words of Wesley's considered
judgments in front of us, allied with his revisions and other
variants, and these supported and illuminated by scholarly
introductions and footnotes. Thus we shall be able to consider
his ideas and practices untrammeled by doubts about authentic
ity, and shall therefore be able to assign to him more readily his
true place in the varied spheres of thought and action which
consumed his time and energy through sixty-five years
dedicated to improving the human condition. By the end of this
century we may indeed have unfolded most of the new
knowledge about John Wesley, and be nearing the time when it
will be possible to see him whole.
NOTES
1. It is, of course, too early for anything like a complete bibliography of these
writings. For the previous years the most complete listing is the dissertation by Sandra
57
Judson, "Biographical and Descriptive Works on the Rev. John Wesley," University of
London, 1963. See also J. Gordon Melton, "An Annotated Bibliography of Publications
about the Life and Work of John Wesley, 1791-1966," Methodist History, July, 1969, pp.
29-46. For two careful evaluations of the more recent works by Frederick A. Norwood see
"Methodist Historical Studies, 1930-1959," Church History, vol. 28 (1959), pp. 391-417,
and a continuation for the years 1960-70 in the same journal, vol. 40 (1971), pp. 182-99.
See also the selected bibliography prepared for the Drew Consultation by Lawrence D.
Mcintosh, in Kenneth E. Rowe, ed., The Place of Wesley in the Christian Tradition
(Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1976), pp. 134-59. Lists of current dissertations on
Wesleyan and Methodist themes are published regularly in the Proceedings of the Wesley
Historical Society and in Methodist History.
2. For details on membership, or to purchase back or current issues, write to Wayne
E. Caldwell, Th.D., Secretary-Treasurer, 215 E. 43rd Street, Marion, IN 46952.
3. See Michalson, Japanese Contributions to Christian Theology, 1960, p. 3, and for a
sample of the remarkable fruits of this Japanese flowering see the February, 1967, issue of
the now defunct Wesleyan Quarterly Review, pp. 10-102.
4. R. P. Heitzenrater, "John Wesley and the Oxford Methodists," pp. 228, 253-56,
360-61, and for a valuable summary, "The Oxford Diaries and the First Rise of
Methodism," in Methodist History, July, 1974, pp. 110-35, esp. p. 124.
5. Vol. 2, Part 2, pp. 116-17.
6. Unfortunately these corrections were largely lost, because Wesley first issued
them in errata sheets too often missing from the bound volumes of his Works, and then in
a revised edition of his Journals, overlooked by Jackson and discarded by Curnock. See
Frank Baker, " 'Aldersgate' and Wesley's Editors," London Quarterly Review, vol. 191
(Oct., 1966), pp. 310-19.
7. Methodist History, Vol. VI, No. 3 (April 1968), pp. 33-42.
8. Oxford Edition of Wesley's Works, Vol. 1, ed. Albert C. Outler, pp. 35-37 of the
printer's typescript.
9. See Rowe, The Place of Wesley in the Christian Tradition, pp. 94-116.
10. In 1974 N. L. Kellet prepared a dissertation at Brandeis on "John Wesley and the
Restoration of the Doctrine of the Holy Spirit to the Church of England in the 18th
Century."
11. E. P. Thompson, The Making of the English Working Class (Baltimore: Penguin
Books, 1963, 1972), pp. 40-48.
12. Rowe, The Place of Wesley in the Christian Tradition, p. 14.
13. Ibid., pp. 32-33.
14. The simple tablet bears the words, "Si monumentum requiris, circumspice."
15. For a glimpse of the textual problems, the methods used, and the resulting edited
text, see Rowe, The Place of Wesley, pp. 117-33.
58
A LUTHERAN-UNITED METHODIST
1
STATEMENT ON BAPTISM
A QR SEMINAL D O C U M E N T
From time to time Quarterly Review will publish documents of

seminal importance to the church's ministry. The publication of such
official papers can become a part of the minister's working library, not
only for reflection and reference, but for use in preaching, teaching,
and writing. This first statement from the Lutheran-United
Methodist bilateral consultation, forces us to rethink the centrality of
this sacrament and at the same time demonstrates that communica
tion is possible on an ecumenical basis on fundamental issues. The
statement is accompanied by comments from two members of the
consultation, one United Methodist and one Lutheran.
INTRODUCTION
As participants in the Lutheran-United Methodist bilateral

consultation, which has met six times since 1977 and has now
concluded its work, we report with gratitude to our churches the
pastoral, liturgical, and evangelical concord and concern that we
have discovered in our discussions.
It is fundamental to this report to note that our Lutheran and
United Methodist churches acknowledge Scripture as the source
and the norm of Christian faith and life, and share with the
whole catholic church in that Christology and that trinitarian
faith which was set forth in the ecumenical Apostles' and Nicene
Creeds. We also share the biblical Reformation doctrine of
justification by grace through faith. We are agreed that we are
justified by the grace of God for Christ's sake through faith alone
and not by works demanded of us by God's law. We also
recognize the common emphasis on sanctification as a divinely
59
promised consequence of justification. We affirm that God acts

to use the sacraments as means of grace. As heirs of the
Reformation, we share a heritage of scriptural preaching and
biblical scholarship. We also share a hymnic tradition, care for
theological education, and concern for evangelical outreach.
We have continually recognized the validity of the acts of
baptism administered in accord with Scripture in our churches.
While this recognition testifies to our considerable agreement in
doctrine and practice, it rests finally upon the shared
acknowledgment of baptism as an effective sign of God's grace.
First and foremost, baptism is God's gift, act, and promise of
faithfulness. The entire life of faith and even our attempts to
articulate a common understanding of God's prior act of grace
are but a response of praise and thanksgiving.
The acknowledgment of God's gift as validly bestowed in the
acts of baptism administered in United Methodist and Lutheran
churches entails the recognition of the shared benefit of the
work of the Holy Spirit among us. Thus we are called to confess
the scandal of whatever disunity or party spirit may still exist
among us and between us, lest we be found to despise God's
gift. Our unity in Christ and in one Spirit is the unity of those
who have been washed and forgiven, incorporated into Christ's
death and resurrection, and called together for witness and
service in his world until he comes again. This unity made
manifest in baptism is an inauguration and foretaste of the rule
of God in all of life.
Thus we are offering to our churches the following
affirmations, implications, and recommendations as tangible
expressions of our hope that our churches and congregations
will seek further means for achieving a fuller manifestation of
our God-given unity in Christ, of our sharing in one Spirit and
one baptism.
AFFIRMATIONS
1. We accept as valid all acts of baptism in the name of the

Trinity using water according to Christ's command and
promise (Matt. 28:18-20).
2. We affirm that baptism is the sacrament of entrance into the
60
L U T H E R A N - U M C STATEMENT O N BAPTISM
holy catholic church, not simply a rite of entrance into a

particular denomination. Baptism is therefore a sacrament
which proclaims the profound unity of the church (I Cor.
12:13; Gal. 3:27-28). Baptism is a gift of God for the
upbuilding of the Christian community.
3. We affirm that grateful obedience to the divine invitation
obliges all believers to be baptized and to share the
responsibility for baptizing.
4. We affirm that baptism is intended for all persons, including
infants. No person should be excluded from baptism for
reasons of age or mental capacity.
5. We affirm with Scripture that God gives the Holy Spirit in
baptism:
to unite us with Jesus Christ in his death, burial, and
resurrection (Rom. 6:1-11; Col. 2:12);
to effect new birth, new creation, newness of life (John 3:5;
Titus 3:5);
to offer, give and assure us of the forgiveness of sins in both
cleansing and life-giving aspects (Acts 2:38);
to enable our continual repentance and daily reception of
forgiveness and our growing in grace;
to create unity and equality in Christ (I Cor. 12:13; Gal.
3:27-28);
to make us participants in the new age initiated by the
saving act of God in Jesus Christ (John 3:5);
to place us into the Body of Christ where the benefits of the
Holy Spirit are shared within a visible community of faith
(Acts 2:38; I Cor. 12:13).
6. We affirm that in claiming us in baptism, God enables
Christians to rely upon this gift, promise, and assurance
throughout all of life. Such faithful reliance is necessary and
sufficient for the reception of the benefits of baptism.
7. We affirm that baptism is both the prior gift of God's grace
and the believer's commitment of faith. Baptism looks
toward a growth into the measure of the stature of the
fullness of Christ (Eph. 4:13). By this growth, baptized
61
believers should manifest to the world the new race of a

redeemed humanity, which puts an end to all human
estrangement based upon distinctions such as race, sex,
age, class, nationality, and disabling conditions. In faith and
obedience, the baptized live for the sake of Christ, of his
church, and of the world which he loves. Baptism is a way in
which the church witnesses to the faith and proclaims to the
2
world the Lordship of Jesus Christ.
IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Baptism is related to a Christian community and (except in

unusual circumstances) shoidd be administered by an ordained
minister in the service of public worship of the congregation.
We agree that baptism should not be a private act. In
communities where United Methodist and Lutheran
congregations exist, they can support one another as they
resist pressure for private family baptisms. Normally, for
reasons of good order, the ordained officiate at baptisms,
but any person may administer the sacrament in unusual
circumstances.
2. Lutherans and United Methodists agree that prebaptismal
instruction of candidates and their parents (or surrogate parents) is
of crucial importance.
Therefore, we encourage ministers and congregations to
take this instruction seriously and to support one another
as they resist pressure to minimize such instruction.
3. The Christian community has the responsibility to receive and
nurture the baptized. When infants or children are baptized we
regard it as essential that at least one parent, surrogate parent, or
other responsible adult make an act of Christian commitment to
nurture them in the Christian faith and life.
There may be circumstances in which the refusal of baptism
is appropriate because this condition has not been met.
Both United Methodist and Lutheran pastors can support
one another by respecting and interpreting the action of
one of them who has refused to administer baptism.
62
1
L U T H E R A N - U M C STATEMENT O N BAPTISM
Sponsors (or godparents) may support the parent, surro

gate parent, or other responsible adult in this act of
commitment but are not substitutes for such a committed
individual.
4. When a Christian family is partly Lutheran and partly United
Methodist, the nurture of the baptized child is of primary concern,
Here an opportunity also exists to display Christian unity in the
midst of diversity.
It is important for one congregation to assume primary
responsibility to nurture the child in the Christian life.
Where one parent is more active than the other, it is
recommended that the sponsoring congregation be the
congregation of the more active parent.
It is recommended that the prebaptismal instruction be
given by the pastor of the sponsoring congregation; or joint
instruction under both pastors can take place, as this will
enrich both traditions.
5. We believe baptism is not repeatable.
Because we understand baptism as entrance into the
church, we do not condone rebaptism of persons on any
grounds, including those related to new Christian experi
ence or change of denominational membership.
Since United Methodists and Lutherans recognize one
another's baptism, we violate the integrity of our faith,
pervert the meaning of baptism, and impair our relation
with other baptized Christians if we rebaptize.
6. When instructed persons have made their profession of faith for
themselves in baptism, their Christian initiation requires no
separate rite of confirmation.
Baptism is sacramentally complete even though the
baptized Christian looks forward to a lifetime of Christian
instruction and growth through regular reaffirmations or
renewals of the baptismal covenant.
7. We respect each other's practice of confirmation.
We rejoice that both communions have an appreciation for
63
the lifelong need for a pastoral and educational ministry.

The baptized should be given frequent opportunity to
reflect upon the meaning of their covenant through
confirmation, sermons, curricula, and other such means.
While orientation to the history, liturgy, and practice of the
denomination and of a particular congregation is appropri
ate for persons who transfer from one of our denomina
tions to the other, a further confirmation rite should not be
required,
8. Baptism witnesses to Christian unity, and therefore it enables
transfer between our denominations.
Because we believe that baptism is the fundamental
intiation into the church, we affirm our oneness in Jesus
Christ as taking precedence over our denominational
divisions.
When persons transfer their membership between our
denominations, they should not feel that they have thereby
broken their earlier baptismal and confirmation promises.
Pastors should provide opportunity for those transferring
to make public reaffirmation of their baptism with the new
congregation and denomination in an appropriate manner.
Each denomination affirms the pastoral and nurturing
ministry of the other denomination and gladly commits
members to the care of the other denomination when its
own denomination does not provide an adequate congre
gational family for those members.
Because we are baptized not into a denomination or into a
particular congregation only but into the one church of
Jesus Christ, therefore in communities where both Luther
an and United Methodist congregations exist, efforts may
be made to share mutually in baptismal celebrations,
thereby showing forth our essential unity.
9. United Methodist and Lutheran theology and practice allow
baptism to be administered in various modes, including immersion,
pouring, and sprinkling.
We agree that whatever mode is used, baptism is an act in
64
LUTHERAN-UMC STATEMENT O N BAPTISM
which the use of water is an outward and visible sign of the

grace of God. The water of baptism, therefore, should be
administered generously so that its sign value will be most
effectively perceived by the congregation.
10. The celebration of baptism should reflect the unity of the church
which baptism proclaims.
Because in baptism the contemporary church is united to
the historic church, baptismal rites should draw upon the
ancient traditions of the church and also should serve to
illustrate the catholicity of the church in our time. We
recommend that in addition to the normative trinitarian
baptismal formula in accordance with Matthew 28:19, the
celebration of baptism include the renunciation, the
Apostles' Creed, and the prayer of thanksgiving over the
water.
We urge the common development of liturgical formula
tions for the rite of baptism by the liturgical agencies of our
respective churches.
CONCLUSION
This document represents the consensus of the undersigned

members of the dialogue team after three years of intense
discussion and prayerful deliberation. We commend it to our
churches for their study and action. We hope it will serve as an
impetus and resource for dialogue among Lutheran and United
Methodists in local communities and throughout our churches,
Washington, D. C.
December 11, 1979
PARTICIPANTS VOTING YES
Lutherans Augustana College

Dr. J. Thomas Tredway Rock Island, Illinois
(LCA)
Chairperson of the Delegation Bishop Darold H. Beekman
President (ALC)
65
:
QR ADVANCE ED O N , F A L L 1980
Southwestern Minnesota )r. Joseph Burgess

District itaff
Willmar, Minnesota Executive Director
Division of Theological
Dr. Harry Huxhold (AELC) Studies
Pastor Lutheran Council in the
Our Redeemer Lutheran U.S.A.
Church New York, New York
Indianapolis, Indiana
United Methodists
Bishop Jack M. Tuell
The Rev. Margaret Krych
Chairperson of the Delegation
(LCA)
Portland Area
Assistant Professor
The United Methodist
Lutheran Theological
Church
Seminary at
Portland, Oregon
Philadelphia
Philadelphia,
Dr. E. Dale Dunlap
Pennsylvania
Vice-Chairperson of the
Delegation
Dr. Klaus Penzel (LCA) Dean and Professor of
Professor of Church Theology
History Saint Paul School of
Perkins School of Theology Theology Methodist
Southern Methodist Kansas City, Missouri
University
Dallas, Texas The Rev. Hoyt Hickman
Assistant General
Dr. Alice Schimpf (ALC) Secretary for the Section
Professor of Religion on Worship
Capital University Board of Discipleship
Columbus, Ohio The United Methodist
Church
Dr. David L. Tiede (ALC) Nashville, Tennessee
Associate Professor of New
Testament Professor Ethel R. Johnson
Luther-Northwestern Methodist Theological
Seminaries School in Ohio
St. Paul, Minnesota Columbus, Ohio
66
LUTHERAN-UMC STATEMENT O N BAPTISM
Dr. Kenneth Kinghorn Dr. Thomas Trotter

Professor of Church General Secretary
History Board of Higher Education
Asbury Theological and Ministry
Seminary The United Methodist
Wilmore, Kentucky Church
Nashville, Tennessee
The Rev. Arthur J, Landwehr
Senior Minister Dr. James F. White
First United Methodist Professor of Christian
Church of Evanston Worship
Evanston, Illinois Perkins School of Theology
Southern Methodist
The Rev. Martha Rowlett University
Sierra Madre, Dallas, Texas
California
The Rev. Jeanne Audrey
Dr. Laurence H. Stookey Powers
Professor of Preaching and Staff
Worship Assistant Ecumenical Staff
Wesley Theological Officer
Seminary The United Methodist
Washington, D. C. Church
New York, New York
PARTICIPANT VOTING NO
Lutheran Systematic Theology

The Rev. Jerrold A. Concordia Seminary
Eickmann (LCMS) St. Louis, Missouri
Assistant Professor of
PARTICIPANTS ABSTAINING
Lutherans Church
The Rev. Arthur J. Crosmer Twin Falls, Idaho
(LCMS)
Vice-Chairperson of the Dr. Willis L. Wright (LCMS)
Delegation President
Pastor Alabama Lutheran College
Immanuel Lutheran Selma, Alabama
67
Lutheran Designations:
AELC-Association of Evangelical Lutheran Churches

ALC-The American Lutheran Church
LCA-Lutheran Church in America
LCMS-The Lutheran ChurchMissouri Synod
NOTES
1. The statement is reprinted here with permission, copyright Division of Theological

Studies of the Lutheran Council in the U.S.A. and the Commission on Christian Unity
and Interreligious Concerns of The United Methodist Church.
2. See the statement of the World Council of Churches, One Baptism, One Eucharist, and
a Mutually Recognized Ministry,
68
WHAT WOULD LUTHERANS AND
UNITED METHODISTS TALK ABOUT IF
THEY WERE TO TALK?
ARTHUR J . LANDWEHR
The ecumenical impulse created not only Vatican II and the

Consultation on Church Union but also a bevy of bilateral
conversations. Over the past fifteen years the Lutheran Council
in the U.S.A. and the United Methodists have had such
conversations. Both have had bilaterals with the Roman
Catholic Church. The Lutheran Council has had conversations
with the Anglicans, the Orthodox, and the Reformed churches.
Not until the spring of 1977 did The United Methodist Church
and the Lutheran Council meet to talk.
The Lutheran Council in the U.S.A. is composed of The
Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (LCMS), The American
Lutheran Church (ALC), The Lutheran Church in America
(LCA), and the most recent addition, The Association of
Evangelical Lutheran Churches (AELC). United Methodists and
Lutherans met to discuss baptism and to explore mutual
agreements and points of difference, both as they related to
orthodoxy and orthopraxis.
Baptism was chosen because it is basic for entrance into the
church and because it is being widely discussed within both
denominations. Both use water in administering baptism for
sprinkling, pouring, or immersion. The traditional formula, "in
the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit/' is
common to both rites. But where would they go with that?
Methodologies used in the analysis of any puzzle are
important. The methodology determines the character of the
results one achieves. Traditional ecumenical methodologies
used in dialogue have usually begun with Scripture, or creeds,
or expositions of particular historic episodes. It would have been
tempting in this instance to have begun with a historical and
Arthur J . Landwehr is senior minister, First United Methodist Church, Evanston,

Illinois.
69
theological analysis of Luther's and Wesley's understanding of

baptism. Then comparisons could be made, which would either
close or widen the two centuries between them. From there the
journey into the contemporary period could begin. This long,
laborious historical-theological trek is filled with risks that
challenge the wisdom of the enterprise itself. The likelihood of
repeating history and failing to uncover new possibilities is
high. While deepened understanding of another's position from
a historical perspective is a decided plus, such understanding is
not likely to demand moving toward new positions.
In this dialogue the methodology began with orthopraxis.
Each church body presented a survey of practice within its
church. What do you do? became the question to give insight
into What do you believe?
This approach proved beneficial very early. Unspoken
presuppositions each had of the other were quickly exposed.
"Methodists are nice people but really have no theology," so
went one stereotype. "Lutherans are nice people but are
theological fossils," went another. To speak of praxis early
allowed for these unspoken presuppositions to surface and
encouraged a dynamic candor. Candor of the highest quality
was one of the major strengths of our discussions from the
beginning to the end.
"What do you do?" Liturgical practice, ecclesiastical polity,
the meaning of church membership, the use of creeds, pastoral
practice, and other matters were shared in a systematic way.
From this experience certain insights emerged. United Method
ists know theology! Lutherans were not fossils! This brief
introduction to each other demonstrated that in practice the
commonalities between the churches were greater than any had
hoped for. Both churches baptized, preached the Word,
administered the sacraments, and ordered their life for
evangelism and mission. Furthermore their praxis was theolo
gically based.
United Methodists confessed to some practices that were not
normative for them. Baptizing a second time, "dry cleaning"
baptism (faking it where there is no water in the font!), and other
deviations from orthopraxis were noted. Lutherans also
admitted to some "innovations." In one congregation the
70
BAPTISM STATEMENT C O M M E N T
eucharist was offered to all members in Christian families,

including babies. Their reasoning was simple. Just as you do not
wait for a baby to understand the principles of nutrition before
feeding it, so you do not ask a baby to understand the doctrinal
significance of the Lord's Supper before you nurture it in faith. If
baptism may be administered under this rationale, so may
Communion.
The ritual of baptism practiced by United Methodists derives
from an understanding of baptism as a rite of initiation. A child,
youth, or adult is baptized into the church of Christ, not into the
denomination. Baptism takes us into Christ's holy church, and
confirmation marks reception into a particular denomination of
Christ's holy church.
Lutherans hold a similar view but place baptism in the context
of the Word: "Baptism is nothing else than the Word of God in
water." It represents the ongoing life of the Christian. Thus it
becomes the basis for ethical action in the world. Christian
baptism is lived out in the world.
What is significant is evolution away from an emphasis placed
by both denominations in earlier years upon the fallen nature of
humanity for which baptism was the cure. Both churches are
moving toward an understanding of the benefits of baptism in
one's life as it is lived in the world. For United Methodists this
has meant an evolution of emphasis away from their nine
teenth-century concept of conversion as the main event in the
spiritual journey, to baptism as a sacramental sign celebrating the
covenant already offered the baby or affirmed by the youth or
adult.
Baptism then distinguishes the Christian by initiating the
baptized into faithful obedience to Christ. As Klaus Penzel
stated, "Holiness is not separation from life; divine service
cannot be divorced from human service, nor the altar from the
supermarket."
Only after much discussion about orthopraxis were Luther
and Wesley mentioned. Comparing these two theologians, who
had two different agendas in two different cultures and in two
different periods of history, is almost ludicrous. Luther
develops his argumentation against the backdrop of the Roman
Catholic Church and Scholastic theology. Wesley does his
71
theology out of an Anglican framework in the context of Deism.

Albert Cutler's observation that Luther is a disjunctive
theologian and Wesley a conjunctive theologian states the
distinction succinctly.
Penzel assisted the dialogue by offering a way to transcend
these two classical positions. Again, methodology is pivotal.
Historical reductionism, which would assert that Methodism
and Lutheranism are what they were originally, leads to the
dead-end of making historical relics normative for the present.
On the other hand, historical relativism, which would define
them in a context that they are everything they ever have been,
denies them their basic foundations in revelation.
Penzel's first step to transcending these two positions was to
take on the challenge of making the "experienced order" of
separation between present ecclesiastical bodies conform to the
"conceptual order" of the biblical faith in one Lord, one baptism,
one church. The divine gift of unity is already given in Christ. It
is now a matter of appropriating that unity not only for the sake
of the church, but also for the purposes of the gospel which is
given for the sake of the world.
The United Methodist/Lutheran dialogue from the standpoint
of orthopraxis and orthodoxy had difficulty with a common
sphere of discourse. The problem in part centers in the
difference between Lutheran confessionalism and United Meth
odist denominationalism. This explains why Lutherans have an
easier time relating to Roman Catholics and Reformed while
United Methodists relate to other denominations more easily.
Lutheranism is born with a passion for doctrinal truth, while
United Methodism embodies a compassion for persons and the
truth of love. Lutheran dottrinal emphasis leads "confessiona-
lists" to assert that the chief differences in churches is doctrinal.
The denominations tend to think differences between the
churches are institutional and practical. United Methodists,
however, have a unique posture, which tends to hold both a
confessional principle and a conciliar principle in creative
tension.
Ecumenical priorities for each church are therefore different.
Lutherans do not believe institutional matters have anything to
do with the essence of the church. Therefore, they seek doctrinal
72
concurrence in ecumenical dialogue. United Methodists find the

ecumenical thrust leads to a rearrangement of institutional and
practical matters.
Yet when it comes to the praxis, Lutherans, who confess
together, are widely divided on their understandings of
authority and the proper interpretation of Scripture. Within
Lutheranism itself is the need for what Penzel called "reconciled
diversity." This would bring together confessional identity and
ecumenical fellowship. It also would enable the confessional
principle of Lutherans to be inclusive and to think of themselves
as a confessional movement within the church. The "connec-
tional principle" in United Methodism contributes a form for
theological pluralism to develop in which neither dogmatism
nor indifferentism is encouraged.
Lest one neglect doctrinal matters, one must emphasize
points of doctrinal intersection. It soon became clear to dialogue
members that Luther had strong strains of sanctification in his
theology. United Methodists could not claim sole possession to
this doctrine. Wesley, on the other hand, saw repentance as the
porch of religion, justification by faith as entrance to the house of
salvation, and sanctification as living in the house. Justification
by faith and holiness of heart go together. Therefore Lutherans
had to understand that Wesley did not introduce a new
Pelagianism.
It soon became clear that a consensus was emerging at a
relatively fast rate among the United Methodists, the ALC, and
LCA churches. Because the AELC joined the discussions in
1978, following their split with the Missouri Synod, their
contributions were not very forceful but were supportive of the
emerging consensus. Also apparent was the fact that Lutheran
confessionalism was deeply in trouble between the three
Lutheran churches and The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod.
This became actualized when one of the Missouri Synod
representatives voted no and two others abstained in the call for
approval of the consensus document.
The implications of this consensus statement for the
ecumenical family are many. The power of the sacrament of
baptism as a uniting force among the Christian church is
overwhelming. Rural and essentially small churches that make
73
up the majority of congregations for both denominations could

cultivate new opportunities for easier acceptance of one another
into membership. Many churches require reconfirmation. This
perspective of baptism puts confirmation in another light and
makes reconfirmation unnecessary, if not prohibitive. From a
pastoral perspective this should be an advantage.
A firm acceptance of this understanding of baptism would
have implications for mutual sharing in the eucharistexciting
for some, intimidating for others. An examination of what
baptism implies offers opportunities for table fellowship.
Penzel's idea of "reconciled diversity" comes into play and
could be drawn upon should such a mind prevail among the
ecclesiastical bodies.
Finally it must be mentioned that the issue of authority is one
that contains a knotty issue for further dialogue. The Lutheran
sola scriptura really translates into sola scriptura and the Book of
Concord. The assumption is that there is nothing in the latter that
is not in the former. United Methodists speak of the primacy of
Scripture, with reason, tradition, and experience as added
linchpins of authority.
The theoretical issues created by these different bases of
authority are variegated. However, if the dialogue implements a
methodology that concerns itself with orthopraxis such immi
nent danger signs might be overcome. It is how one uses the
Bible, how one applies scriptural truth rather than sloganizing
about it, that becomes definitive for dialogue.
At a time in which denominations are tempted to the laager
mentality, bilateral conversations offer the openness necessary
to express the unity God gives in Christ, and to further
theological inquiry. This document is available to local church
study groups for further reflection and comment. At the
grass-roots level we have reason to believe some new things can
happen between Lutherans and United Methodists!
74
IT SEEMED GOOD TO US . . .
AND THE HOLY SPIRIT!
D A V I D L. TIEDE
What do you hope to accomplish? The question frequently put

the members of the United Methodist and Lutheran dialogue
teams on notice that such ecumenical discussions are currently
met with general apathy, some disdain, and little expectation or
sense of urgency. The reticence to consider yet one more merger
or church union is fully understandable in this era, and the
current consolidation of denominational positions amplifies
persistent institutional disinterest in change, especially if it
appears to be imposed from tfie top down. Members of this
dialogue also discovered quickly that differences within the
denominations were more obtrusive than those between them.
After a few initial skirmishes in which blatant stereotypes were
exposed, hope for accomplishing anything beyond another
bland committee report that would "seem good" and offend no
one ran at a low ebb.
Not that anyone should have been surprised. The long history
of ecumenical councils, debates, and dialogues is replete with
long sieges of plodding conversation, stalemates, and even
setbacks. Romanticized depictions of that past may only obscure
the humdrum humanity of earlier ecumenical discussions at the
expense of blinding the modern community of faith to the work
of the Holy Spirit in, with, and under the modest efforts of
boards and commissions. Thus, for example, reading the Acts of
the Apostles through rose-colored glasses may trivialize both
the past and the present. Acts notes explicitly that the
revolutionary full acceptance of the Gentiles without circumci
sion was neither eagerly sought by most of the church nor well
received by all. The agreement that "seemed good to the Holy
Spirit and to us" (Acts 15:28) actually emerged from churchly
David L. Tiede is associate professor of New Testament at Luther-Northwestern

Theological Seminaries, St. Paul, Minnesota.
75
turmoil and produced further controversy, as Paul's letter to the

Galatians indicates. Even those in Acts who are depicted as
supporting the new mission practice most actively did so
because they did not wish to find themselves "withstanding
God" (Acts 11:17).
The illustration is telling with regard to the United Methodist-
Lutheran Statement on Baptism on at least two counts. First, the
modest achievement of the statement deserves notice for the
clarity it contributes to the common faith of these Christian
traditions. Although one representative of The Lutheran
Church-Missouri Synod issued a statement "dissociating him
self," and the other representatives of that Synod abstained, all
participants in the dialogue contributed directly to its composi
tion. Classic Christian teaching on the evangelical dimension of
baptism as God's gracious act allowed the group to steer a steady
course without veering off into endless polemical disputation or
arriving too quickly at trite agreements. As in Acts 15, the
statement of accord has theological content, which has dramatic
implications for the church's ministry.
Second, it was concern for the mission and ministry of the
church that drew the discussion forward and required honest
consideration of the meaning of baptism for the lives of the
people of God in our congregations. Again, this concern was not
unique to this dialogue. Since the Jerusalem council and down
through the great mission conferences of the past century, such
attention to the effective ministry of the church has been one of
the critical marks of authentic ecumenical discussions. Never
theless, whatever clarity of insight or courage of conviction this
final statement may contribute to the lives of our denomina
tions, it probably is founded in this pastoral concern.
At the risk of imposing my personal reminiscence on the
reading of the document, I would propose that the commitment
to ministry lies at the heart of the matter, both as it led the
dialogue out of its initial impasse of theological debate and as it
highlights the potential significance of the statement for the
church. The pastors in the groups deserve special commenda
tion for repeatedly bringing the perspective of reality and
proportion to the discussion. The initial scriptural, theological,
and historical statements that were presented for discussion
76
were helpful starting points and had an impact on the final

statement. But attempting, for example, to write an initial
statement on the New Testament teaching on baptism (which
was my assignment) was a bit like trying to reinvent the wheel
until the discussion surfaced pastoral practices of rebaptism,
transfers of membership, and the refusal of baptism. It quickly
became apparent that there was no need to create a new dogma
or to mount a theological attack in order to reprove heresy. But
there was a genuine cause for searching the Scriptures and
reflecting together on classic Christian teaching regarding
baptism in order that divergent baptismal practices in our
congregations might be conformed as media of the gospel of
divine grace and claim on the people of God.
The emergence of that concern was like a breath of air, or if
you will, an infusion of the Spirit, in our discussion. We
Lutherans tend to be very cautious about basing much of
anything on our experience. We are thoroughly committed to
moving from doctrine to practice. Yet the experience of this
dialogue testified to the validity of the counterflow. Dogma and
the professional theologians were requested to sit lightly on
their magisterial roles and to serve in a ministerial capacity.
Indeed, the commonality of faith shared by these denomina
tions enabled the descent from the heights of lofty theological
generality in pursuit of the interpretation of the complex
particularities of pastoral care.
All of which experience and history are germane to a comment
on the document because the statement is very intentionally a
word to the churches rather than a pronouncement for them. Its
emphasis upon the divine initiative in baptism relies upon and
seeks to reinforce the classic ecumenical teaching and practice of
baptism in our traditions. While resisting any magical view of
the sacrament, the document stresses the lifelong claim on the
baptized that is made in the rite as fundamental to Christian
identity and salvation. In both the doctrinal and pastoral
affirmations, the common needs of prebaptismal instruction
and congregational participation are constantly in view.
It is now the heartfelt hope of the dialogue group that the
denominations and congregations will appropriate all or parts of
the statement as they prove helpful. Perhaps in some
77
congregations, the evangelical interpretation of baptism will

assist pastors who are confronting pieties where the religious
experience of the individual is claimed as necessary and
efficacious for salvation. Perhaps another pastor will be
contending with the indiscriminate practice of baptism either as
a family ritual or as a magical insurance policy with no prospect
of a lifelong bond having been instituted in reliance on God's
promise. In each case, the statement seeks to support the clear
witness of these Christian traditions to our solidarity of trust in
God's promises. Clergy and laypersons of both denominations
are encouraged to stand shoulder to shoulder in their faithful
witness and mutual respect of one another as baptized
Christians.
No doubt a great deal more could and should be said about the
implications of baptism for our solidarity in the quest for social
justice and for the manifestation of our unity in corporate
ecclesiastical structures. Further discussion of the denomina
tional differences that create obstacles to our common witness is
certainly required by the very reliance on God's promises and
obedience to divine commands claimed in the statement. This
document is only a modest beginning.
Yet, founded in our common trust in God's promises, this
little testimony counsels hope for the continued building of
reciprocal respect, reproof, and encouragement. Mutual sup
port between local congregations and clergy is encouraged with
the intention of diminishing the effectiveness of those who
would play pastor against pastor or congregation against
congregation. The focus upon all of the Christian life as
endowed with the saving benefits of baptism as received in trust
is an effort to enhance the evangelical outreach of both
denominations, emphasizing the personal and societal dimen
sions of salvation.
Whether the statement "accomplishes" any of these objec
tives or even assists in their accomplishment finally depends
upon what the church guided by the Spirit does with the
statement. Even ecumenical dialogues must let go and refrain
from seeking to justify their own existence. Like the council in
Jerusalem, we could not even claim complete agreement, and
from Galatians it would appear that the dissenters received most
78
of the press coverage in the early church too. But we also remain
confident that our effort will be fruitful for the church and that
our testimony stands as more than another expedient report
from a weary committee. Unlike the council in Acts, we did not
face a divisive issue in the church where the experience of the
direct intervention of the Spirit compelled the confession, "It
has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to u s " (Acts 15:28).
Nevertheless in full confidence that we too were led to deal with
matters that are directly related to our common Christian
vocation of witness in word and deed, we commend this
statement to our churches with the confession, "It seemed good
to us . . . and the Holy Spirit!"
79
BOOK REVIEWS
The reviews in Quarterly Review are intended to do more than tell a potential
reader what the contents of a book are and what the reviewer thinks of the book.
The reviews are no less important than the essays in each issue, and are
designed to be essays in themselves. Reviewers are encouraged to write not only
about the books but what they represent in a body of literature and within a field
of knowledge. Where possible, several titles of one particular genre will be
included for comparison purposes. Like the essays, the reviews are aimed at
stimulating the thinking of professionals in the church about the nature of
ministry. To that end, some reviews will offer evaluations of works within a
particular discipline each year, with an eye toward helping the practictioner
select the most worthy. Others may review journals within a field.
BETZ AND SANDERS DEPICT PAUL A M O N G JEWS AND GENTILES
Reviews by David J . Lull
E . P. Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism: A Comparison of Patterns

of Religion. Fortress Press, 1977. 627 pp. $25.
H . D. Betz, Galatians: A Commentary on Paul's Letter to the Churches
in Galatia. HermeneiaA Critical and Historical Commentary on
the Bible. Fortress Press, 1979. 352 pp. $27.95.
Although Krister Stendahl's book Paul Among Jews and Gentiles

(Fortress Press, 1976) is not among the books reviewed in this article,
his title is fitting for a review of the books by E . P. Sanders and H. D.
Betz. But, while Stendahl's interest is in Paul's attitudes toward Jews
and Gentiles and their relationship, here we are concerned with the
light these two recent books on Paul shed on the relationship between
Paul's thought and religious-philosophical thought among Jews and
Gentiles in the Greco-Roman world. Both books treat aspects of the
David Lull teaches New Testament at the School of Theology at Claremont, is a

research fellow of the Center for Process Studies at Claremont, and chairs the Process
Hermeneutic and Biblical Exegesis Group of the Society for Biblical Literature.
81
connections between Paul and the intellectual culture of the Greek East
during the period of the early Roman Empire. It is appropriate,
therefore, to discuss both books, which are otherwise quite different in
form and content, under this single topic.
The bulk of Sanders's book (Part 1, 395 pages) is devoted to

describing the "pattern of religion" reflected in three bodies of Jewish
literature of Palestinian origin: Tannaitic, or early Rabbinic, literature
(nearly a third of the book), the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the Apocrypha
and Pseudepigrapha. Sanders calls the "pattern of religion" that is
common to all Palestinian Jewish literature, with the exception of IV
Ezra, "covenantal nomism" (following W. D. Davies), which he
describes as follows:
( 1 ) G o d h a s c h o s e n Israel a n d ( 2 ) g i v e n t h e l a w . T h e l a w implies b o t h (3) G o d ' s

p r o m i s e to m a i n t a i n t h e election a n d ( 4 ) t h e r e q u i r e m e n t to o b e y . (5) G o d
r e w a r d s o b e d i e n c e a n d p u n i s h e s t r a n s g r e s s i o n . ( 6 ) T h e l a w p r o v i d e s for
m e a n s of a t o n e m e n t , a n d a t o n e m e n t r e s u l t s in ( 7 ) m a i n t e n a n c e o r
r e - e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f t h e c o v e n a n t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p . ( 8 ) All t h o s e w h o a r e
m a i n t a i n e d in t h e c o v e n a n t b y o b e d i e n c e , a t o n e m e n t a n d G o d ' s m e r c y b e l o n g
to t h e g r o u p w h i c h will b e s a v e d . A n i m p o r t a n t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e first a n d
last p o i n t s is t h a t e l e c t i o n a n d u l t i m a t e l y s a l v a t i o n a r e c o n s i d e r e d to be b y
God's mercy rather than h u m a n achievement (p. 422).
In Part 2 (less than one fifth of the book) Sanders examines the
"pattern of religion" reflected in Paul's views on soteriology, the law,
and the human predicament. Calling it "participationist eschatology"
(reminiscent of Albert Schweitzer's "Christ mysticism"), Sanders
describes this pattern in these terms:
G o d h a s s e n t C h r i s t to b e t h e s a v i o u r o f all, b o t h J e w a n d G e n t i l e ( a n d h a s
called P a u l to b e t h e a p o s t l e to t h e G e n t i l e s ) ; o n e p a r t i c i p a t e s in s a l v a t i o n b y
b e c o m i n g o n e p e r s o n w i t h C h r i s t , d y i n g w i t h h i m to sin a n d s h a r i n g t h e
p r o m i s e of his r e s u r r e c t i o n ; t h e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n , h o w e v e r , will not b e
c o m p l e t e d until t h e L o r d r e t u r n s ; m e a n w h i l e o n e w h o is in C h r i s t h a s b e e n
freed f r o m t h e p o w e r o f sin a n d t h e u n c l e a n n e s s o f t r a n s g r e s s i o n , a n d his
b e h a v i o u r s h o u l d b e d e t e r m i n e d b y his n e w situation; since C h r i s t d i e d to s a v e
all, all m e n m u s t h a v e b e e n u n d e r t h e d o m i n i o n of sin, "in t h e flesh" a s
o p p o s e d t o b e i n g in t h e Spirit ( p . 5 4 9 ) .
Sanders, comparing Paul and Palestinian Judaism, concludes that

their "patterns of religion," despite similarities, are quite different. For
both, salvation is by "grace" and judgment is by "works." Inclusion
among those who are to be saved precedes those things one must do to
maintain that status and is based on divine action rather than human
achievement. The difference is that for Paul membership among those
82
BETZ AND SANDERS O N PAUL
who will be saved is conceived as a process of participating in a field of

force, "Christ" or the "Spirit," which transforms the very structure of
one's existence; that is, as transferring from the sphere of the "flesh" to
that of the "Spirit." In such a "pattern of religion" repentance and
atonement for transgressions have no place; and, in fact, the language
of repentance-atonement-forgiveness is virtually absent in the genuine
letters of Paul. For Paul, what is wrong with human existence is its
enslavement to the "flesh"; salvation is transferring from that sphere
and participating in the sphere of the Spirit. As Sanders puts it, the
problem with human existence is its failure to be "in Christ." For
Judaism, however, the problem is the failure to be a member of the
Sinai Covenant community; here repentance and atonement for
transgressions have a place, and there is no notion of transferring from
one sphere to another (Sanders leaves it up to the reader to make
modern sense of all this).
It is customary, following the influence of Rudolf Bultmann, to think
that Paul argued from the human predicament to its solution. This way
Paul's train of thought would be as follows: The problem of human
existence is the effort to base one's life on one's own achievements; the
law plays into the hands of this effort to secure one's life before God;
therefore, the solution is to be sought elsewhere, namely in Christ.
Sanders thinks, however, that Paul argued in the opposite direction,
from solution to human predicament. Then Paul's train of thought
would be: Since salvation is only in Christ, it cannot be in the law;
therefore, the human predicament must be beyond remedy by the law;
that is, it must be with the very structure of human existence itself.
With this understanding of Paul and with the interpretation of
Palestinian Judaism in the bulk of the book, Sanders seeks "to destroy
the view of Rabbinic Judaism which is still prevalent in much, perhaps
most, New Testament scholarship" (p. xii). Sanders attacks the canard
"that Judaism was a religion of legalistic works-righteousness" (p. 549)
and argues that Paul's "critique of the law is that following the law does
not result in being found in Christ" (p. 550). "In short, this is what Paul
finds wrong in Judaism: it is not Christianity" (p. 552; Sanders's
emphasis). The social value of this exposure of the anti-Judaism in New
Testament scholarship (see also Charlotte Klein, Anti-Judaism in
Christian Theology, Fortress Press, 1975) alone makes the book worth
reading.
Sanders's stated "general aim" of his book is "to argue a case
concerning Palestinian Judaism (that is, Judaism as reflected in
material of Palestinian provenance) as a whole; . . . [and] to carry out a
comparison of Paul and Palestinian Judaism" (p. xii). Nevertheless,
Sanders goes beyond these limits briefly and compares Paul with
83
non-Palestinian Judaism. He spends less than four pages discussing

"Paul, Hellenism and Hellenistic Judaism" (pp. 552-56), which
concern primarily Paul and Philo, with whom Paul's views are most
closely compared. Yet nothing is said about Gentile "patterns of
religion," and very little about "Hellenism" itself.
Sanders's conclusion is negative: Paul's "pattern of religion" is
essentially different from Palestinian Judaism, and in relation to
Hellenistic Judaism, where Paul is most similar, namely in his view of
the plight of humanity, no one source for Paul's view can be found. The
reason Sanders gives for this negative conclusion is the direction of
Paul's thought from soteriology to the human predicament. Paul
begins with the meaning of the death and resurrection of Jesus
(salvation is exclusively in Christ), from which he inferred the problem
of human existence, for whose description Paul drew from several
diverse sources. In other words, Sanders views Paul's thought as
soteriologically and christologically determined and not as determined
by the thought-worlds of his intellectual culture, whose concepts Paul
employed to explain the "reverse of his soteriology," from which they
derive their meaning (pp. 555-56).
But is this an adequate historical model? How else did Paul
understand the "meaning" of the death and resurrection of Jesus
except in terms of the thought-worlds of his intellectual culture? We
will return to this question after taking a look at Galatians by Betz,
whose approach to Paul as a historical figure is quite different.
Betz's commentary, as the subtitle of the Hermeneia series

(recommended as a whole to the readers of this journal as the best
available in any language) indicates, represents a "critical and
historical" approach to the Letter to the Galatians. The introduction (33
pages) includes, besides the traditional introductory matters, a
detailed literary analysis of the argument in the letter according to "the
conventions of Greco-Roman rhetoric and epistolography" (pp. 14-25),
a concordancelike outline of "traditions and doctrinal presupposi
tions" in Galatians (pp. 26-28), and a summary of Paul's "theological
argument in Galatians" (pp. 28-33). In the analysis of the letter (288
pages), Betz provides a translation of the Greek, compared in the notes
with the RSV, NEB, and JB, at the beginning of each section of the
letter, followed by a general analysis and then a detailed interpreta
tion, verse by verse, of each section. Interspersed are fourteen
discussions of special theological and literary problems that arise at
various points in the interpretation of Paul's letter.
The footnotes contain extensive references to primary ancient texts,
biblical and nonbiblical, to help situate Paul's thought within the
84
BETZ AND SANDERS O N PAUL
intellectual culture of the Greco-Roman world. These notes also situate

Betz's interpretation within the history of exegesis. Finally at the back
of the commentary, in addition to a selective bibliography and indexes,
Betz provides the texts from which he reconstructs the theological
position of Paul's opponents in Galatia (pp. 328-35; for a summary of
their position, see pp. 5-9): namely, texts from Josephus, the Kerygmata
Petrou, and Justin Martyr, as well as II Cor. 6:14-7:1, which Betz
regards as an "anti-Pauline fragment" (see his article in JBL 92 (1973),
88-108).
According to Betz's literary analysis, Galatians combines features of
the "magical letter" (see the curse in 1:8-9 and the blessing in 6:16), the
"heavenly letter" (see the "angel from heaven" in 1:8 and the "angel of
God" in 4:14), and the "apologetic letter," examples of which are found
in antiquity. The formal characteristics of the "apologetic speech"
guide Betz's outline of the body of Galatians into the introduction of
the "cause" of the letter (1:6-ll), the presentation of the "facts" leading
up to the crisis in Galatia (1:12-2:14), a summary of the points of
agreement and the disputed issue, and an anticipation of the following
line of argument (2:15-21), then the main arguments themselves
3:1-4:31), followed by an argument in the form of ethical advice
pertinent to the Galatian problem (5:1-6:10). Framing Paul's "apolo
gy," and giving it the form of a letter, are the epistolary prescript (1:1-5)
and postscript (6:11-18), which also contains a recapitulation of Paul's
main arguments in the letter.
The crisis in Galatia, Betz argues, is the result of efforts by Jewish
Christians (missionaries?) to persuade Gentile Christians in Galatia
that salvation in Christ requires their obedience to the law, of whose
commandments the requirement of circumcision is singled out for
special attention. Paul's message to the Galatians is a defense of their
Spirit-given salvation, which Paul summarizes by the term "freedom"
(see 5:1,13 and the allegory in 4:21-31), a status and life they would lose
if they submit to circumcision and take up a life of obedience to the law
(see esp. 5:2-4).
Elsewhere (in my dissertation, The Spirit in Galatia, forthcoming from
Scholars Press) I have argued that Betz uses (unawares) Max Weber's
theory about the "routinization of charisma" to explain how and why
the Galatians were open to the persuasion of Paul's opponents. Betz's
view is that, when the initial period of pneumatic enthusiasm (see
3:1-5) had worn off, the Galatians discovered that Paul had left them, in
their opinion, without adequate means for coping with the problems of
daily life, especially with "transgressions" (see 6:1), and that when
they heard Paul's opponents' statements about the law, they were
tempted to adopt its way of dealing cultically as well as ethically with
85
"transgressions." However, Betz's Weberian explanation misinter

prets the evidence of the letter. Not only did the Galatians continue to
think of themselves as "pneumatics" (6:1), so that their "initial period"
of enthusiasm had not worn off (in 3:5 Paul refers to experiences of the
Spirit as continuing in the present), but they already had received
ethical instructions from Paul at their baptism (see 5:21), so that they
had not been left without any code of ethics and any means of dealing
with transgressions (the point of 5:13-6:10 is that they are to continue
relying on the Spirit, as Paul had already instructed them).
On the whole, however, Betz's more precise placement of Paul's
thought in relation to Gentile religious and philosophical thought, as
well as in relation to Judaism, results in an explanation of the events in
the Galatian churches and of Paul's views on the law that is more
adequate historically than Sanders's attempt to relate Paul merely to
various forms of Judaism. Betz relates Paul's views on the law in
Galatians to the devaluation of city laws and the emphasis on the "law
of nature" or "unwritten law" in the Socratic tradition, and to the Stoic
concept of degeneration from ideal origins in history. According to
Betz, the former Gentile view on law was also applied, but differently,
to the law in Judaism by Philo; and the latter Stoic view of history may
have been applied to Judaism prior to the Maccabean revolt by the
"Hellenistic reformers," who tried to rid Judaism of its "particularistic"
laws and customs, and to integrate it with Hellenistic culture (see pp.
166-67; for the latter, also see p. 139).
In conclusion, the value of Sanders's book is his exposure and

dismantling of the anti-Jewish view of Judaism in New Testament
scholarship and his alternative to the Bultmannian interpretation of
Paul. The importance of Betz's commentary is his effort to place Paul
within Gentile as well as Jewish religious and philosophical thought in
the Greek East during the period of the early Roman Empire. Sanders's
book is needed because the categories for understanding the New
Testament as well as Judaism are loaded with anti-Judaism; and Betz's
book is needed because the tendency is to treat Paul in at least partial
isolation from his own intellectual culture.
But both of these correctives should be pushed even further. What is
needed is a more thorough comparison of all sides of the controversy
over the law within earliest Christianity, and between Christianity and
Judaism, and the various Gentile views on law in the Greco-Roman
world. For it is generally taken for granted that, while Paul's critique of
the law was non-Jewish (if not anti-Jewish), his opponents' affirmation
of the law was strictly Jewish. But both sides of the law-issue in Galatia
have parallels in Jewish and Gentile views on law. Paul's views on the
86
TWO-CAREER MARRIAGE
law can be compared with Jewish views in the "Hellenistic reform

movement" prior to and during the Maccabean period, and with Philo
(and even Hillel?), as well as with Gentile philosophical views on law.
Likewise, his opponents' views on the law have parallels not only in
Judaism but also in Gentile philosophical views on law. For example,
Dio Chrysostom, a first-century ( C . E . ) Cynic-Stoic philosopher,
expressed the common view that no city could survive without law (see
Oration 75:2). And Plutarch, a first-century ( C . E . ) Platonist and at times
also Cynic-Stoic, wrote Lives praising Lycurgus and Solon as lawgivers
par excellence, while criticizing the antinomianism of Epicurean
philosophers (see Against Colotes 1124D-1125B). Gentiles, therefore,
were not all antinomians, nor did they all hold views on law similar to
Paul's; indeed, most Greeks and Romans during the period of the early
Roman Empire affirmed the necessity of law as much as any Jew, or as
any of Paul's opponents, did. One could even say that the emphasis on
the law in the sense of commandments (nomos) is as much a result of
"Hellenistic" influence as was the effort to rid Judaism of its
particularistic laws and religious customs, just as one could say that
both views are equally "Jewish," at least before the emergence of
"normative" Judaism in the period after the Roman destruction of
Jerusalem.
These observations point to the need to dismantle not only the
categories used by New Testament scholars to view Judaism but also
those used to describe "Hellenism." In the end we will have a clearer
picture of the intellectual culture of the New Testament and a clearer
picture of the New Testament as a part of that culture as well. The
books by Sanders and Betz have cleared the way for the carrying out of
this task.
THE CHURCH AND THE TWO-CAREER MARRIAGE
Reviews by Rosemary Skinner Keller
G. Wade Rowatt, Jr. and Mary J. Rowatt, The Two-Career Marriage.

Westminster Press, 1980. 119 pp. $4.95.
Rosemary Skinner Keller is o n e - h a l f o f a two-career couple in ministry in the Chicago

area. She is a diaconal minister and assistant professor of religion and American culture
at Garrett-Evangelical Theological Seminary in Evanston. She and Rosemary Ruether are
editing and writing Women and Religion in 19th Century America: A Documentary History, to
be published by Harper & Row in 1981. She also is co-editor with Hilah Thomas of essays
on women in Methodist history from the Women in New Worlds conference, to be
published by Abingdon in 1981.
87
Francine Hall and Douglas Hall, The Two-Career Couple. Addison-

Wesley, 1979. 259 pp. $5.95.
Virginia Ramey Mollenkott, Women, Men, & the Bible. Abingdon,
1977. 144 pp. $3.95.
Letty M. Russell, The Future of Partnership. Westminster Press,
1979. 200 pp. $6.95.
Edward R. Dufresne, Partnership: Marriage and the Committed Life.
Paulist Press, 1975. 135 pp. $5.95.
A good friend recently gave my husband and me a cartoon of a

clergyman performing the wedding service of a young man and
woman. The caption contained the minister's words to the couple,
sealing their marriage: "I now pronouce you a two-spouse working
household."
The humor of the cartoon struck me immediately. I had not stopped
laughing, however, before a nagging question arose. Is the church
saying anything more than that to the two-career couple? Since my
initial reaction, the question has taken different forms. As the church
seeks to address the quality of family life in its congregations, is it
helping dual-career couples relieve the stress and overcome the perils
inherent in their intense and pressure-filled lives? Does it make any
difference in a two-career marriage if both partners are Christian? Is the
church helping dual-career couples develop a vision of marriage
different from that advocated by secular society?
In the churches my husband has served for the past twenty years, we
have seen the nature of congregational life change radically. The nuclear
family, with the husband as sole wage earner, the mother as full-time
homemaker, and at least one child at home, is no longer the dominant
model. It is more the rule than the exception to have families with both
parents employed outside the home, families with single parents,
childless couples, and single persons. Yet these diverse family units have
this in common: They seek the church as a larger family in Jesus Christ.
My own daily experience adds a further dimension. Teaching at
Garrett-Evangelical Theological Seminary, I see the startling change in
the nature of clergy families since the time of our seminary experience
and the early years of our marriage. Clergy couples make up a
significant portion of the seminary's enrollment; the spouse of a
clergyperson is more likely than not to be pursuing his or her own
career; the term "clergy wife" is seldom used, with "clergy spouse"
being the appropriate expression; highly capable women are serving in
increasingly large numbers with men in ministry; and more single
persons, both divorced and never married, pastor congregations than
was conceived possible in the past.
88
TWO-CAREER MARRIAGE
If churches are to speak to the needs and realities of their

memberships and of the communities of which they are a part, they
cannot continue to think of the family primarily as the traditional
nuclear unit. Rather, they must seek to address the diversity that
characterizes the household of God on the local scene. Some recent
books raise significant issues for pastors and congregations who would
begin to deal seriously with the presence and needs of the many
two-career couples in their midst.
The Two-Career Marriage by G. Wade Rowatt, Jr. and Mary Jo Rowatt,

is the first book that proposes to deal directly with the dual-career
relationship from a Christian perspective. Fart of the Christian Care
Books series edited by Wayne Oates, it is an introduction to the
two-career life-style. It can be used by lay people in personal study, by
pastors in counseling, or by marriage support-groups in local
churches.
The book could be useful to couples in which both partners are
employed but have not yet confronted the necessity of personal
changes in work responsibilities at home. It could lead persons to
struggle with role stereotypes and to seek a life-style that offers
freedom from some of the narrowly defined prescriptions that society
has imposed on women and men.
The Rowatts' book points in two directions. First, it introduces
practical guidelines to aid a couple in working through the daily
difficulties of a two-career marriage. Second, it recognizes the church's
responsibility to clarify and teach values that do not merely reinforce
secular standards, but provide a biblical and theological foundation for
a two-career life-style.
Primarily, the book focuses on guidelines to deal with the personal
issues and problems of the dual-career life-style. It identifies and
considers ways to alleviate sources of stress inherent in a two-career
marriage. The authors give practical suggestions to enable the entire
family to share responsibility for functions previously accepted as part
of the woman's role.
The Two-Career Marriage also explores ways to enhance the quality of
life for the whole family. Persons who have been strongly influenced
by the ideas underlying Marabel Morgan's Total Woman, should
consider a basic thesis of the Rowatts"The freedom for self-expres
sion in a vocation liberates a total woman to give more of herself in
family interaction." Growth opportunities are also open to the man in a
dual-career marriage. Freed from expectations of the macho image, he
is released to be a caring and loving personand to find those
expressions valued as a part of masculinity.
89
In their final chapter, the authors point to the response the church
should make to two-career marriages. "The evils of restrictive attitudes
about females and males need to be replaced by a full theology of
persons based on both the Biblical teachings and the attitudes of Jesus
toward men and women." Unfortunately, the Rowatts do not deal
with these biblical teachings. Many readers to whom this book might
appeal have had a strong dose of theological justification for the
separation of male and female spheres, and they need help in
developing a fuller biblical vision.
In specific ways, the book falls short in establishing a theological
base for mutuality and equality. The writers view the dual-career
marriage as a two-way covenant between partners; but they give no
attention to the purpose of God in the covenant. The Rowatts also
indicate the economic advantages of a two-career marriage, which may
free the couple for a more giving way of life; but they do not introduce
the values basic to a simpler life-style, which could counter the
acquisitive, affluent goals that secular society presses on all who would
listen.
Other books develop in more depth the practical guidelines and

theological foundations upon which a dual-career marriage may be
based. The most useful book to deal with down-to-earth problems and
realistic possibilities of growth is Francine and Douglas Hall's
Two-Career Couple, Though written from an avowedly secular
viewpoint, the book focuses on important values the church can build
upon, as well as some it can question.
The authors recognize that career involvements have too often
consumed men in their traditional work roles. The danger inherent
in a two-career relationship is that careers will engulf both the
woman and the man unless limits are consciously set. To be
successful in both profession and family requires sacrifice and
stamina. Whether the marriage relationship is sustained and grows
depends, first, on how committed both partners are to their
relationship and to both careers. It depends, second, on how
self-consciously the partners deal with the stresses and practical
issues of their complex life-style. The fruits of the commitment are in
the daily sharing and support given to each other.
The Halls advocate a "protean" life-style, based upon couples'
commitments to gain greater control of their lives. Partners should
shape their values and decide how to invest their time and energy,
rather than letting institutions of employment make the sole
determinations. The protean life-style would reject upward mobility as
a standard of success, affirming instead a sequence of fulfilling work
90
TWO-CAREER MARRIAGE
experiences for both individuals. Couples must develop a new

meaning for success, based upon satisfaction, enjoyment, and
involvement in their roles, rather than titles, salary, and admiration
of others. The protean life-style involves a conscious effort to combat
workaholism. Success at work may mean personal failure in
relaxation, love, and family life. Partners must consciously build
time together into their lives and not be manipulated by seductions
of promotions, travel, and entertaining in their careers. The
possibiity of relocation becomes a question of life-style choice. Will
career benefits really offset the other partner's loss and the
psychological strains on the family?
These basic characteristics are necessary to sustain a two-career
life-stylea shared set of priorities, mutual support, skill in problem
solving, flexibility, and willingness to adjust career demands to family
needs. The Halls conclude that most two-career couples have begun to
change their expectations of the woman's and man's roles. Now they
need to adopt new patterns that will incorporate their changed
outlooks into daily life. This book gives concrete help to those who are
willing to look closely at their relationshipwhere it is now and where
they would like to take it.
Yet the questions remain: Is the church saying anything more than
this to the two-career couple? Can it help persons establish values for a
different vision of partnership than that offered by secular society?
Three recent books, written from divergent personal perspectives,
suggest thoughtful theological implications for a two-career marriage:
Women, Men, & the Bible, by Virginia Mollenkott; Partnership: Marriage
and the Committed Life, by Edward Dufresne; and The Future of
Partnership, by Letty Russell. While not one of these books focuses on
marriage alone, each sees the union of Christians based on more than a
covenant between two persons.
Virginia Mollenkott stands squarely within the evangelical tradition
in terming herself a biblical feminist. "Perhaps the most disturbing
feature of the many attacks on equal-partnership marriage," she
writes, "is the assumption that the success of the marriage is almost
entirely the responsibility of the wife." Offering an alternative to
women and men who have been deeply influenced by The Total
Woman, Mollenkott states,
Self-sacrifice is beautiful w h e n it is d o n e a s C h r i s t did it: in a b s o l u t e f r e e d o m a s

a n e x p r e s s i o n of t h e d e e p e s t d r i v e s of t h e p e r s o n a l i t y a n d w i t h o u t a n y i n t e r e s t
in r e c o m p e n s e . B u t t h e self-sacrifice n o w b e i n g u r g e d u p o n t h e C h r i s t i a n wife
is e n t i r e l y different. It is n o t a c h o i c e freely m a d e b u t r a t h e r a c o u r s e of a c t i o n so
d e e p l y i n g r a i n e d b y socialization a n d so c o n n e c t e d w i t h d i v i n e a p p r o v a l t h a t
t h e w o m a n a c t u a l l y has n o c h o i c e ( p . 4 0 ) .
91
Such a course teaches nothing short of idolatry of menworship of

husbandsMollenkott continues; but we are to revere and surrender
ourselves unto God alone.
In Women, Men, & the Bible, Mollenkott develops her thesis that
service to others is rooted in Christian submission to one another, in
the thrust of Jesus, and in Paul's understanding of equality of persons
in the eyes of God. The author focuses on such texts as Ephesians
5:21-33, so often used to justify submission of wives to husbands. In
the context of the preceding verse, chapter, and the entire Letter to the
Ephesians, however, Christians are called to be subject to one another
out of reverence for Christ. When Paul told husbands to love wives as
Christ loved the church, the model of Christ was that of "self-emptying
love" taking the form of a servant and born in human likeness.
Mollenkott's insights regarding mutual submission in modern
marriage have significant theological implications for two-career
couples. Mutuality in decision-making is at the heart of such a
marriage, with no assumption that either person should have the final
word. Both partners are equally vital and valid in determining God's
will for the family. Mutual submission might mean that the more
assertive and articulate partner should teach the less confident to
present views more persuasively. Mollenkott makes an important
contribution as a biblical feminist in the evangelical tradition.
In The Future of Partnership, Letty Russell explores theological

foundations and new forms of human partnership from her
perspective as a liberation theologian. Partnership of Christians in
marriage is only one structure of the relationship to which the author
applies her biblical and theological understandings. Others include
ministry of the laity, clericalism, and Christian education. She helps
Christians grapple with a basic stance for their faithand challenges
them to apply it to the most important areas of their lives.
Christians find the pattern for their relationships with others in
God's self-presentation to humanity as both Lord and Servant.
Servanthood has been associated with lowly service to others; and
lordship, with God's hierarchical position over us. Russell focuses on
the unity of these functions. God chose to serve, not to rule over us.
Christ's lordship came through his service of healing, feeding, and
proclaiming the Word.
The liberating Word for Christians is that they have been created and
redeemed for service in Christ's name. True humanity, in terms of the
New Creation which already has begun, is based on service, not on
sexuality. Women and men are freed from defining themselves in
terms of qualities previously prescribed as male or female.
92
TWO-CAREER MARRIAGE
Of the book's many implications for dual-career relationships, two

may be noted. First, both partners must be sensitive to the gifts God
has given them and must seek to refine those talents for greatest use.
The abilities they have received may not be of equal value. Still, each
partner is responsible for seeking the full humanity of the mate and the
release of those gifts for service in Christ. Second, based upon God's
self-presentation, they must create a way of life that includes serving
each other and also those beyond the relationship, but without being
subservient. Hierarchical relationships of power involving men and
women are replaced by functional ones in which leadership can rotate
from one mate to the other, depending on the goals, abilities, and gifts
called for in a particular circumstance.
Henri Nouwen, who wrote the foreword to Partnership: Marriage and

the Committed Life, terms it "a Christian spirituality for married
people." His phrase exemplifies Edward Dufresne's purpose in
writing the bookto reach beyond the distractions of married life and
make partnership into an expression of commitment to God.
Partnership is a personal statement of what marriage means to the
author, Edward Dufresne, a Roman Catholic pastoral counselor, and
his wife Sandra, a United Methodist minister. Partnership is especially
valuable to clergy couples or to persons who hope, through marriage,
to merge their personal commitments into a creative life of service.
The Christian response to marriage has too often resulted in a
tension between the world's affairs and the Lord's affairs. A profound
ambivalence has been built into marriage for Christians. Persons
normally become so involved in gaining wealth, power, and property
to provide for their families that spiritual dimensions have little real
meaning. Marriage needs to be freed from the "cultural prison of social
status, material consumption, and compulsive self-interest"com
mitments that make it impossible to dedicate one's life totally to Christ.
In Dufresne's analysis, the madness of the world is inescapable. It
creates the monstrous anxiety in our minds that we never have
enoughpossessions, fulfillment, or time. Those who endeavor to
commit their lives to Christ suffer the additional pain of knowing they
are mad. This painful knowledge can be the starting point for resisting
the "needism" of secular culture and seeking a simpler life-style.
Dufresne's vision has profound implications for two-career
couplesparticularly those who desire their marriages to be a
life-style for ministry. The pressures of consumerism have a
peculiarly insidious effect on dual-career marriages in a society in
which increased economic power too easily leads people to convert
luxuries into basic needs. Further, two-career couples never have
93
enough timeeither for work or for relaxation. The author persuasively

contends that partners need to scale down their ambitions as well as their
style and standard of living. This need may be even greater for
dual-career couples than for other married people. Their witness of a
simpler life-style could be equally powerful as a ministry in Christ's
name.
The two-career couple has been termed the most important single
phenomenon of the twentieth century. Changes in the family can be
more threateningand more liberatingthan in any other institution.
Prior to the Industrial Revolution, the home and place of work were
one, with women and men working together on the farm. By the early
nineteenth century, urbanization and industrialization helped create
separate spheres for home and work, as men found their basic identity
in the world, and women, within the home. A new pattern is emerging
today which posits no separate sphere for either women or men.
Rather, both can function together in the world and can share
responsibility for the quality of life in the home.
Revolutions for human rights, including the sexual revolution, are at
the heart of this changing perspective. The dual-career couple could be
one agent in pioneering for a world without spheresa world of
wholeness for both women and men.
Of all the things the church can affirm about dual-career marriages,
the opportunities it opens for wholeness, equality, and the develop
ment of both partners' gifts are among the most important. This does
not mean, however, that the church should bless this form as the new
standard for all. Rather, it should honor the diversity of family life,
which is, and always has been, a reality.
Further, the church needs to raise some serious questions regarding
two-career marriages for the next two decades of this century. Is it
realistic to believe that couples in dual-career marriages can do more
than handle their two careers and save some quality time for
themselves? Does the two-career life-style leave the partners time or
energy for ministry beyond their immediate families? In the long run,
how will this life-style affect the institution of marriage and the care of
children?
As a person committed in marriage to a two-career life-style, I raise
these questions in the hope that the church will seriously confront
them and begin to provide the help and support needed for this
widespread expression of family life.
94

Fall 1980 Quarterly Review - Theological Resources For Ministry

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Fall 1980 Quarterly Review - Theological Resources For Ministry

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

V O L . I, N O .

Exegesis of Isaiah P a s s a g e s for Advent

A publication of T h e United Methodist Publishing H o u s e

Quarterly Review provides continuing education resources for professional

Since the mid-1800s, the name Quarterly Review has been

John Emory, book agent of the Methodist Book Concern,

For this class of periodicals there is certainly a greater vacancy in the

Seminarians study such documents, but the general impression

Each issue of Quarterly Review will carry an extended exegesis

1 The word which Isaiah the son of Amoz saw concerning

come, let us walk

Micah 4:1-3 is an almost exact duplicate of Isaiah 2:2-4. Verses

Such a juxtaposition deserves serious contemplation at this

of the absolute unpredictability of the Second Coming. Three

more commonly, "light and darkness." In this scheme, "spirit"

1 There shall come forth a shoot from the stump of Jesse,

or decide by what his ears hear;

10 In that day the root of Jesse shall stand as an ensign to

Traditionally, the second Sunday in Advent shifts attention

which they challenge the king and, indirectly, his subjects as

theological projections of Israel's political destiny under God.

making preparation for the coming of God in Christ into our

This divine appearance may be construed as a time and a

delight in him whom we revere than it is to take delight in what

society. Surely he would not, in this country with its

Gospel lesson by Jesus' trailblazer, John the Baptist: "Repent,

The wilderness and the dry land shall be glad,

3 Strengthen the weak hands,

5 Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened,

8 And a highway shall be there,

Today's Scripture lessons highlight the themes of the mission

either to turn a highway into a wilderness for oppressors or to

but the character of Jesus' messiahship. By the same token, and

All three of the Epistle writer's examples of patiencethe

Our three suggested lessons lend themselves equally well to

the entire books in which they occur. This proviso applies

offer of a sign carries with it no option for its addressees

Though discouraged by this turn of events, Isaiah proceeded

because of the infinite distance between God and mortals, he

dream"a typical agent and a typical medium of divine

Nowhere does Jesus' transmutation of the messianic hope in

How do pastors, counselors, campus ministers, and other profes

Christmas is a time when the ordinary and the extraordinary

Robert C. Leslie is dean of the Pacific School of Religion in Berkeley, California. A

large in the Christian calendar, but there is no other season that

supportive community was present to assist in talking out

determined by past events. To be sure, the past does play a very

contrast between sickness and health, between brokenness and

the lay person, are quite easily understood in the psychiatric

We thought we knew him. We have heard about him, read

aspects of Wesley's theology, especially as that theology was

The development of Wesley's thought. It now seems somewhat

of the Oxford Edition. The early manuscript sermonsmore

word, because he had only the faith of a servant, not that of a

[His last twenty years] was a time of still further theological

Theological themes in recent Wesley study. Although the early and

few changes of emphasis. Most serious students today,

as "our doctrines": the loss of the image of God through original

Preacher (1955). A valuable specialized study which carefully

and practice. On the sacraments the slight work of John R. Parris,

"The Atonement in the Theology of John and Charles Wesley"

Seeing Wesley whole. A Colossus towering over all others